The Manager, Future General India Insurance Company Ltd. V/S Sri Suman Das
Sri Suman Das filed a consumer case on 21 Jun 2023 against The Manager, Future General India Insurance Company Ltd. in the West Tripura Consumer Court. The case no is CC/71/2022 and the judgment uploaded on 22 Jun 2023.
Tripura
West Tripura
CC/71/2022
Sri Suman Das - Complainant(s)
Versus
The Manager, Future General India Insurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)
District- West Tripura- 799001................Opposite Parties.
__________PRESENT__________
SRI GOUTAM DEBNATH
PRESIDENT,
DISTRICT CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.
DR (SMT) BINDU PAL
MEMBER,
DISTRICT CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.
SRI SAMIR GUPTA
MEMBER,
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.
C O U N S E L
For the Complainant : Sri Indrajit Bhowmik,
Sri Diptanu Debnath,
Learned Advocates.
For the O.P. No.1: Sri Sampad Choudhury,
Learned Advocate.
ORDER DELIVERED ON: 21.06.2023.
F I N A L O R D E R
1. Sri Suman Das, herein after called 'the complainant' has filed this complaint pleading inter alia that for his self employment he runs a business namely M/S Ananya Bazar at Ranir and such retail business establishment of cloths was insured with the O.P. Insurance Company.
1.1In the night of 07.10.2021 due to short Circuit of electricity 7 items namely (1) Computer Monitor, (2) Mother Board of Computer, (3) SMPS, (4) C.C. Camera, (5) A/C machine, (6) Computer Printer, (7) Electrical Wiring & Other Electric goods of the complainant were damaged.
1.2The complainant lodged claim with the O.P. as per the Fire Insurance Policy claiming Rs.72,538/- which the O.P. denied to pay on the ground that under the terms of the policy the claim was not maintainable. Hence, this complaint.
2.The O.P. in written statement pleaded that the complainant is not a consumer and that the surveyor of the O.P. Insurance Company surveyed and submitted report that as per General Exclusion Clause vide Clause No. 7, viz- “Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy” the claim was not maintainable.
3.Both the parties submitted evidence on affidavit and documents including the policy of insurance.
4.Hearing argument the following points are formulated for discussion and decision:-
(i) Whether the complainant is a consumer?
(ii) Whether the complainant is entitled to compensation as per Policy of Insurance?
DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION:
5.Both the points are taken up together for convenience.
5.1The O.Ps although took the plea that the complainant is a Deed Writer by profession but has not proved such pleading. We find no reason for not believing the complainant that for his livelihood by way of self employment, the complainant runs the retail cloth shop namely “M/S Ananya Bazar”.
5.2For the sake of brevity clause 7 with General Exclusion of the policy of Insurance is reproduced below:-
“Loss, destruction or damage to any electrical machine, apparatus, fixture or fitting arising from or occasioned by over-running, excessive pressure, short circuiting, arcing, self heating or leakage of electricity from whatever cause(lighting included) provided that this exclusion shall apply only to the particular electrical machine, apparatus, fixture or fitting so affected and not to other machines, apparatus, fixtures or fittings which may be destroyed or damaged by fire so set up.”
5.3From the written statement of the O.P. the report dated 22.11.2022 submitted by the surveyor is also reproduced below:-
“.......being entrusted to carry out the final survey by the competent authority. I physically inspected the above mentioned insured's business establishment on 21.10.2021. At the time of inspection observed that due to high voltage of power system the insured's one AC Machine, one Cash Memo Printer, One Computer Monitor, Six CC Camera, one Ceiling Fan, one Mother Board and One SMPS were damaged internally but no fire was broke out in the Insured's business establishment. On the basis of physical inspection it was revealed that cause of loss is not admissible as per terms and conditions (as per General Exclusion No.07) of the Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy.”
6.Electric machine means a device which converts mechanical energy into electrical energy like generator, motor etc.
7.In the case at hand, it is not the case of the complainant that any electrical machine was damaged. Rather, the 7 items listed by the complainant in the complaint petition are not electrical machines. Computer(electronic devices) etc. are run by electricity. As such the alleged report of the surveyor is a mechanical report having no legs to stand in law. Hence, we do not find any reason to discard the case of the complainant as the O.P. Insurance Company has not disputed the case of the complainant otherwise.
8.Both the points are decided accordingly.
9.In the result, it is ordered that the O.P. Insurance company shall pay the sum of Rs.72,538/- to the complainant with interest @ 7.5% P.A., if not paid within 30 days from the date of this Final Order.
10.The case stands disposed of. Supply copy of this Final Order free of cost to both the parties.
Announced.
SRI GOUTAM DEBNATH
PRESIDENT,
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
WEST TRIPURA: AGARTALA
DR (SMT) BINDU PAL
MEMBER,
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
WEST TRIPURA: AGARTALA
SRI SAMIR GUPTA
MEMBER,
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
WEST TRIPURA: AGARTALA
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.