SRI. JIMMY KORAH (PRESIDENT) The case of the complainant is that he was the holder of Fire insurance policy and during the existence of this policy, fire occurred in his shop. According to the complainant he sustained a loss for more than 4 lacks. He preferred claim before the opposite party. But they paid only a meager amount. The second opposite party is the financier of the complainant shop. The allegation against the second opposite party is that they were not taken any steps to recover the claim amount. 2. Opposite parties filed version. First opposite party insurance company filed version stating that complainant had another policy with National Insurance Company for Rs. 175000/- in addition to the cover for Rs. 600000/- from first opposite party. Hence first opposite party is liable to pay only proportionate claim. Insurance company deputed a surveyor and he assessed only Rs. 17059/- as proportionate share. This amount was received by the complainant as full and final settlement. The second opposite party stated that they are answerable to the claim of the complainant and no relief can be allowed against second opposite party bank. 3. Considering the rival contentions of the opposite parties this forum framed following issue. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties? 4. Complainant examined and produced 6 documents which are marked as Exts. A1 to A6. Opposite party examined two witnesses and produced 6 documents and marked as Exts. B1 to B6. 5. The case of the complainant is that his shop got fire and a loss of Rs. 400000/- has caused. There is no dispute with regard to the fire in the insured premise. The dispute is regard with the quantification of loss. The first opposite party appointed a surveyor and the report was marked as Ext. B6. As per this report the loss assessed was Rs. 52321/-. But the first opposite party reduced some amount on the reason that double policy for the same cover. But the policy copy of the National Insurance Co. and the terms and conditions of the policy of the New India Assurance Co. (1st opposite party) has not produced before this Forum. In the absence of any supporting documents this contention cannot be taken in to consideration. On going through Ext. B1 policy copy it can be seen that “Fire & Allied Perils: Contents, excluding money & valuables, but including furniture fixture fittings and stock in trade.” This shows that furniture is not excluded. After deducting all items as per the case of the opposite party surveyor has assessed Rs. 22516/-. But instead of that insurance company paid only Rs. 17016/-. If the insurance company paid at least Rs. 22516/- and obtained Ext. B3, the claim of full and final settlement can be considered. Instead of that they paid only a less amount without stating any reason. This itself is a deficiency of service. Further first opposite party has not given the survey report to the complainant. Hence the claim of full and final settlement cannot be considered. There is no evidence produced by the complainant regarding the loss to an amount of Rs. 400000/-. If he had such a loss he can very well produce purchase bills or stock register. In the absence of any concrete evidence the contention of the petitioner cannot be considered. Further petitioner has not cross examined the surveyor and not takes any steps to disprove this report. Hence on the available circumstances and evidence the first opposite party is liable to pay Rs. 52321/- to the complainant. The first opposite party is directed to pay this amount after deducting the amount already paid in this case along with 12% interest from the date of repudiation of claim. 6. Regarding the allegations against the second opposite party there is no document produced by the complainant for supporting his claim. Even though considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the second opposite party may consider his request for giving any relaxation from the payment of interest as per the norms and regulations of the Reserve Bank of India for NPA classified accounts. 7. In the result complainant allowed and first opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 35305/- (Rupees Thirty five thousand three hundred and five only) with 12% interest from 11.01.2008. Complainant is also entitled to get cost of Rs. 4000/- (Rupees Four thousand only) from first opposite party. First opposite party is directed to pay this amount within 30 days from date of receipt of this award. Pronounced in open Forum, on this the 29th day of March 2010. Sd/- Sri. Jimmy Korah: Sd/- Sri. K. Anirudhan: Sd/- Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi: Appendix :- Evidence of the complainant PW1 - B.D. Dinamon (Witness) Ext. A1 - Spot Mahazor Ext. A2 - Statements Ext. A3 - Fire Force fire report, dated. 10.01.2008 Ext. A4 - FIR (Photocopy) Ext. A5 - News paper reports Ext. A6 - Stock statement (Photocopy) The evidence of the opposite party:- RW1 - Saraswathy Balachandran (Witness) RW2 - P.T.R. Balu (Witness) Ext. B1 - Policy Ext. B2 - Fire insurance claims form Ext. B3 - Stock statement (Photocopy) Ext. B4 - Policy schedule (Photocopy) Ext. B5 - Policy schedule (Photocopy) Ext. B6 - Survey report dated. 05.08.2008. // True Copy // By Order Senior Superintendent To Complainant/Opposite party/S.F. Typed by:- vo/- Compared by:- | 
