Present (1) Nisha Nath Ojha,
District & Sessions Judge (Retd.) President
(2) Smt. Karishma Mandal,
Member
(3) Anil Kumar Singh
Member
Date of Order : 27.07.2018
Nisha Nath Ojha
- In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-
- To direct the opposite parties to settle the claim of the complainant with interest and cost of litigation.
- To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 5,000/- as litigation cost.
- The facts of this case lies in a narrow compass which is as follows:-
The complainant is proprietor of Suhani Sales and engaged in running his business of stationary goods along with paper, carbon etc. and has a godown at D. Singh Road, Kadamkuan, Patna. He has taken a loan in the year 2012 from opposite party no. 3 through CC account for smooth running of his business.
It is further case of the complainant that at the time of sanction of the loan, the Bank ( opposite party no. 3) has insured his godown vide policy no. 2143/00026304/004/02 for the period from 2012 to 2013 which was renewed for the year 2013 to 2014. The premium amount was regularly paid by the complainant to the insurance company.
The complainant has further asserted that due to short circuit of electricity fire broke out in his godown on 01.06.2014 at about 21.40 pm which was informed by his neighbor and fire brigade was also informed. The fire brigade reached at 21.50 pm and extinguished the fire and left the place of occurrence at 22.40 pm. The staff of the fire brigade assessed the loss amounting to Rs. 12,00,000/-. On 02.06.2014 complainant intimated regarding fire and destruction of his godown to the insurance company and lodged Sanha on 03.06.2014 as will appear from annexure – 1.
It has been further asserted by the complainant that opposite parties deputed a surveyor namely Sri Santosh Kumar Sharma who has inspected the place of occurrence on 05.06.2014 and demanded certain documents from him Vide annexure – 2. During the course of inspection the surveyor demanded report from fire brigade on 03.09.2014 in which it is clearly mentioned the cost of destruction due to fire was about Rs. 12,00,000/- as will appear from annexure – 3.
The grievance of the complainant is that opposite party no. 1 and 2 have rejected the claim of the complainant vide annexure – 4 on the ground of submission of fake bill while the fact is that the owner of the Singh Stationary has issued a letter on 13.01.2015 stating that the written invoice given to the complainant is true and genuine. It is surprising that no description of fake bill has been mentioned in surveyor report or intimated to the complainant. Thereafter the complainant has given legal notice to opposite party no. 1 and 2 vide annexure – 6 for redressal of his grievance but no action has been taken. However, the insurance company reply was received repeating the same allegation as will appear from annexure – 7.
From record it appears that when the registered notice dated 19.08.2015 sent to the opposite parties did not return unserved then valid tamila was declared against opposite parties and only opposite party no. 3 has filed vakalatnama but on behalf of opposite party no. 1 and 2 neither written statement nor vakalatnama has been filed and thereafter this case was heard ex – parte.
The complainant has asserted that due to fire he has been put to loss of Rs. 12,00,000/-. No any document has been filed by the complainant to prove the exact loss suffered by the complainant due to fire. However, the complainant has annexed fire brigade report dated 03.09.2014 vide letter no. 2711 from which it transpires that the goods worth of Rs. 20,00,000/- was left from fire and only goods worth of Rs. 12,00,000/- was destroyed. Thus, at the time of occurrence the cost of item stored in godown was about approx Rs. 32,00,000/-. The complainant has annexed the report of fire brigade as well as Sanha which proves the occurrence of fire true but there is no evidence on the record to prove destruction of goods of Rs. 12,00,000/- because the complainant has not annexed the photocopy of the bill as well as list of item destroyed in fire.
On behalf of opposite party no. 1 and 2 neither any written statement has been filed and no any details of fake bill is mentioned in report of surveyor. Annexure – 4 is the rejection of the claim of the complainant. The complainant has annexed annexure – 5 from which it appears that the proprietor of Singh Stationary has written that complainant firm was doing business with him and bill granted by stationary is correct. In annexure – 5 the number of genuine bills has been mentioned.
It goes without saying that the complainant has asserted the aforementioned fact on oath and there is no counter version of the opposite parties hence we have no option but to rely on fact stated in complaint petition which clearly disclose deficiency on the part of opposite party no. 1 and 2.
On perusal of the aforementioned fire brigade report Ref. no. 2711 dated 03.09.2011, it transpires that, the value of goods lost/damaged in fire is Rs. 12,00,000/- approx. the value of goods saved from the fire is Rs. 20,00,000/- approx. as such, it appears that the total value of goods at risk before occurrence of the alleged fire was Rs. 32,00,000/- approx whereas the total sum insured under the insurance policy was Rs. 12,00,000/- only. Hence, the property was grossly under insured owing to which the computation of liability would invite “Condition of Average” clause of the insurance policy and the quantum payable would stands proportionately reduced.
In the absence of final surveyor report and investigation report, it is reasonable to compute the compensation as under :
Insured value of goods x Actual Loss Sustained
Total value of goods at risk at the time of fire
i.e. 12,00,000 x 11,00,000
32,00,000 = Rs. 4,15,000/-
Hence, we feel that quantum of Rs. 4,00,000/- will be sufficient for the complainant which comes to about ¼ of the claim of complainant.
Hence we direct the opposite party no. 1 and 2 to pay Rs. 4,00,000/- ( Rs. Four Lac only ) to the complainant within the period of two months from the date of receipt of this order or certified copy of this order failing which opposite party no. 1 and 2 will pay 10% interest on the above mentioned amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- ( Rs. Four Lac only ) till its final payment.
Opposite party no. 1 and 2 are further directed to pay Rs. 25,000/- ( Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only ) to the complainant by way of compensation and litigation costs within the stipulated period given above.
Accordingly, this complaint stands allowed to the extent referred above.
