This appeal takes an exception to an order passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nashik dated 04/12/2008 in consumer complaint no.21/2008. The facts of the case can be summarized as under:- That the complainant/present respondent has taken an insurance policy bearing no.2101/B.K.Y./XXXII-01/C from the appellant insurance company of Rs.5Lakhs and period of said policy is 01/04/2001 to 31/03/2002. On 20/12/2001 the customer of the complainant/respondent, Shri Mahesh Co-operative Bank Ltd., Nashik credited an amount of Rs.5 Lakhs. However, the cash was stolen and accordingly, complainant has filed a first information report in the police station and the criminal case is pending in the criminal court. Complainant had to compensate an amount of Rs.5 Lakhs to its customer and the appellant i.e. org.opponent is liable to pay the compensation to the complainant. However, the complainant is not compensated with the amount as per the policy and hence, the complainant has issued a notice to the opponent/appellant. Appellant/opponent had communicated that they are liable to pay an amount of consideration of the policy. Hence, complainant/respondent has prayed that the claim of the insurance company of Rs.5 Lakhs may be awarded along with interest and cost to the complainant. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has inquired into the complaint and passed an order dated 04/12/2008 directing opponent to pay an amount of Rs.5 Lakhs towards bankers indemnity insurance policy to the complainant/respondent with an interest @18% p.a. from 18/05/2007 till realization of the amount and cost of Rs.5,000/- from the date of passing of the order. It is against this order that the present appeal is filed. Admittedly, the complainant/respondent had taken a policy of Rs.5 Lakhs i.e. Bankers Indemnity Insurance Policy from the appellant. It is also not disputed that policy was in operation with effect from 01/04/2001 to 31/03/2002. Ld.Counsel for the appellant has drawn our attention to the assessment report submitted by A.P. Phadke & Co. which is at page no.55 of appeal compilation. Surveyor in its report dated 30/03/2007 has observed that “ We are of the opinion that insured have not incurred any loss. Our view is supported by charge sheet filed by Crime Branch in which they have filed case for loss of cash belonging to the Shri Mahesh Co-operative Bank Ltd.”. Again the surveyor has observed that, “ Insured themselves has denied that cashier received cash amounted to Rs.5 Lakhs from employees of Shri Mahesh Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Nashik ”. Ld.Counsel has drawn our attention to the First Information Report (FIR) registered with Bhadrakali Police Station, Nashik which is at page no.68. In the first FIR registered with police by the Manager of the Bank that on 20/12/2001 around 1.30 p.m. the employees of the Shri Mahesh Co-operative Bank Ltd, Nashik had came at the same time when employees of The Akola Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. had came to the bank for depositing the money. The cashier has filled the cash received slip in respect of Shri Mahesh Co-operative Bank Ltd., Nashik and left the counter for accepting the amount of The Akola Co-operative Bank Ltd. During the intervening period employees of Mahesh Co-operative Bank Ltd., Shri Nandkumar Keshavrao Belekar and Shri Kedar1nath Kachardas Chavan had taken the counter slip of Rs.5 Lakhs and without depositing the cash went away and this fact was told to him by the cashier. He further stated in the FIR that above named employees without handing over the cash to the cashier, taken the cash with them. Ld.Counsel had further contended that first information report registered with the police is a very important evidence to substantiate the facts of the case. Ld.Counsel therefore contended that taking into consideration the facts that there is no loss as per the policy condition, appellant has rightly repudiated the claim and further requested that appeal may be allowed and the order of the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum may please be confirmed. Ld.Counsel for the respondent vehemently argued the case. He has drawn our attention to the terms and conditions of the policy which is at page 35 to 40 of the appeal compilation. He particularly pointed out condition in para A of the policy which is “ On Premises” and contended that losses by fire, riot and strike, burgalary or house breaking, theft, robbery or hold-up whether within or without and whether by the employee of the insured or any other person or persons whomsoever specifically cover the incident and the appellant is legally bound to pay the compensation. Further he contended that bank is a public institution and the money is public money and hence, public money may please be compensated. We have heard the arguments of both the Counsels at length and also the evidence placed on record and also considered the facts and circumstances of the case. At page 39 of the terms and conditions of the policy there are Exceptions and Exception-(b) specifies, “losses resulting wholly or partially from any negligent act or omission of the insured employee”. Hence, reliance pressed by Ld.Counsel for the complainant/respondent on condition “On Premises” does not hold good. First information report registered by the Manager of the respondent/ complainant-bank is a very important paper of the evidence wherein the Manager himself has stated that the amount of Rs. 5 Lakhs was not received by the cashier from the employees of Shri Mahesh Co-operative Bank Ltd., Nashik and has went away taking counter foil and without depositing the cash in the bank. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we pass following order:- :-ORDER-: 1. Appeal is allowed. 2. Order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum dated 04/12/2008 is hereby set aside. 3. No order as to costs. 4. Copies of the order herein be furnished to the parties. Nbh | 
