Orissa

Cuttak

CC/90/2016

Biranchi Patra - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sr Branch Manager,United India Insurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

A K Samal

16 Jul 2022

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. COINSUMER DIUSPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

                                                            C.C.No.90/2016

                        Biranchi Patra,

S/O:Durlav Patra,

Res. of At:Dhanapalli,P.O:Mahulia,

P.S:Badamba,Dist:Cuttack.                                               ... Complainant.

 

                                    Vrs.

                        UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,

Cuttack Branch,Link Road,

P.O:Arunodaya Market,Town/Dist:Cuttack,

Pin: 751012, represented by its Sr. Branch Manager.... Opp. Party.

 

Present:           Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                        Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:   11.07.2016

Date of Order:  16.07.2022

 

For the complainant:          Mr. A.K.Samal,Adv. & Associates.

For the Opp.Party.  :          Mr. R.C.Sahoo,Advocate.     

 

Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

                                                                                                                               

`           Case of the complainant in short is that he is a weaver by profession and he earns his livelihood by engaging himself in weaving Patta Sarees,Mercedised sarees which are popularly known as “Maniabandha Patta”.  The said sarees are very costly and are manufactured by the weavers manually by adopting traditional methods without using any modern machines.  The complainant for safety of the sarees and raw materials had taken an insurance policy titled as “Standard Fire and Special Peril” policy from the O.P under which the stock of Patta sarees,Mercedised sarees and Mercerised threads were covered.  The validity of the insurance policy was from 24.4.14 to 23.4.15.  As per the requirement, the complainant had paid the premium of Rs.579/- to the O.P.  The Policy number was 260302/11/14/11/00000010. On 19.7.2014 night there was heavy rainfall                    coupled with storm in the coastal parts of the Odisha. Due to such rainfall, the walls of the house of the complainant had fallen down and the Asbestos roofs were blown off due to the storm for which the stock stored in the complainant’s residence i.e. Patta Sarees,Mercedised Sarees and Mercedised threads were completely destroyed in the rain water.  Due to such loss, the complainant had suffered severe mental shock.  After recovering from his shock on 22.7.14, the complainant intimated the matter to the O.P regarding the incident and requested him to depute a surveyor to assess the loss.  The O.P deputed a surveyor who visited the premises of the complainant on 28.7.14 and took several photographs of the affected materials.  As per the instruction of the surveyor, the complainant produced stock book, purchase bills of raw materials, cost of the damaged sarees, certificate from the Sarpanch and newspaper report cuttings etc.   The said surveyor verbally stated to the complainant the loss was to be assessed at Rs.98,640/-.  The complainant on the same day i.e., on 28.7.14 submitted the claim form in the office of O.P wherein he had claimed Rs.98,640/- towards his loss and had requested for settlement of the claim.  The O.P did not settle the claim of the complainant.  The complainant on 3.11.14, 28.4.15 and 14.12.15 had sent registered letters to the O.P for settling his claim amount at the earliest but till filing of this case the O.P had not settled his claim amount.  In the meantime, one year 11 months had elapsed but the O.P is sitting over the matter which is an example of his gross deficiency in service.  Hence the complainant has filed the case seeking a direction to the O.P to pay an amount of Rs.98,640/- towards the settlement of his insurance claim alongwith interest @ 18% per annum, so also he has claimed compensation of Rs.25,000/- towards the  harassment and his mental agony as well as cost.

            The complainant has filed xerox copies of the documents in support of his case.

2.         The O.P has filed his written version.  The O.P had admitted about the insurance policy taken by the complainant and issue of “Standard Fire & Special Perils Policy” in favour of the complainant covering risk of stock of Patta Sarees,Mercedised sarees and Mercedised threads of the complainant subject to terms and conditions and exclusions in the said policy.  It is stated that the O.P on receipt of the intimation, on 25.7.14 had appointed Er. Satyesh Ku. Prusty, Surveyor-cum-Loss Assessor, who was required to survey into the alleged incident and to report the extent of damage received to the stock in trade of the complainant.  On 26.7.14, the said surveyor inspected the house and stock in trade of the complainant and had submitted his report on 17.9.14.  The surveyor in his report had stated that during his inspection of the stock in trade of the complainant he did not notice any cracks or any kind of damage either in the walls or in the roof of the house of the complainant.  On inspection of the stock in trade of the complainant, the surveyor noticed no damage either to any kind of sarees or thread.  No water spot/water marks found either in any sarees or in any bundle of thread.  The surveyor took several photographs of stocks in trade of the complainant and finally had reported that the complainant’s house and stock received no damage.  The sarees and sarees and the thread alleged to have received damage as shown by the complainant were oldstock materials and as such complainant’s claim is liable to be repudiated.  Inadvertently, the said report of the surveyor was kept in dormant file for which the O.P could not be able to take any steps in the matter.  However, after receiving the notice pertaining to the present case, the O.P searched for the report of the surveyor and on 9.11.16 could trace out the same from a dormant file and on 10.11.16 had repudiated the claim with due intimation to the complainant through registered post.  The delay, if any, in disposing the claim of the complainant was beyond the control of the O.P and inspite of due diligence, the O.P could not take any steps in the matter earlier.  However, the O.P has justified to the repudiation of the claim and stated the complainant is not entitled to any kind of compensation.

            The O.P has also filed xerox copy of some documents in support of his case.

3.         Keeping in mind the contentions of the complaint petition as well as that from the written version, this Commission is of a view to settle the following issues in order to arrive at a just and proper conclusion here in this case.

            i.          Whether the complainant had cause of action to file this case?

            ii.         Whether the case as filed by the complainant is maintainable?

            iii.        Whether the O.P had committed any deficiency in service?

            iv.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him?

Issue  No.3.

            Out of the above issues, issue no.3 being the pertinent issue is taken up first for consideration here in this case.

            The complainant in order to prove his case has filed certificate from the Sarpanch of that area wherein it has been certified that on 19.7.14 at night the materials i.e., Patta Sarees,Mercedised Sarees and threads of the complainant had been damaged resulting in destruction of the said sarees and thread materials.  The incident occurred on 19.7.14.  Due to mental shock for such damage of sarees as well as the thread materials in the rain, the complainant lodged the claim in delay.  He lodged the claim before the O.P on 22.7.14.  The O.P deputed a surveyor on 26.7.14 who had taken several photographs but the O.P remained silent thereafter.  The complainant had repeatedly represented the O.P for settlement of his claim vide letters dt.3.11.14, 28.4.15 and 14.12.15, but the O.P had not responded.  The O.P in the version had averred that after receiving notice from this Commission, they searched the survey report and repudiated the claim of the complainant only on 10.11.16.   The complainant lodged complaint for settlement of claim on 28.7.14.  The O.P after lapse of two years 4 months only on 9.11.2016 had repudiated the claim of the complainant.  Thus, the delay in settlement of claim is a clear case of the deficiency in service.  The O.P had taken plea of misplacement of surveyor’s report but it is not acceptable as the complainant had repeatedly sent registered letters to the O.P for settlement of his claim.    Regarding the loss of the complainant, the Local Sarpanch had given a certificate to the effect that stocks of complainant were damaged due to rain.  In view of such certificate, the surveyor’s report cannot be held to be true.  Hence the O.P had definitely committed deficiency in service.

Issues no.1 & 2.

            The complainant is a policy holder.  As the O.P did not settle the claim amount, definitely there is cause of action for the complainant to file this case and the case is maintainable.

Issue No.4.

            The complainant is found to be entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him.  Hence it is so ordered;

                                                            ORDER

            The case is decreed in part on contest against the O.P.  The O.P is directed to pay Rs.50,000/- towards the settlement of the claim amount of the complainant in the facts and circumstances of the case.  This order is to be carried out within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 16^th day of July,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.                      

                                                                                                                            

                                                                                                Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                           Member.

                                                                       

                                                                                                 Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                             President