Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

176/2011

M/s.Nithya Industries - Complainant(s)

Versus

The National Insurance Co Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

m/S.Prasanna Venkatesh

15 Nov 2017

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :   18.05.2011

                                                                        Date of Order :   15.11.2017

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

     2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

PRESENT: THIRU. M.MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B. M.L.,                     : PRESIDENT            

                  TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                 : MEMBER I

             DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

C.C.NO.176/2011

                                                           WEDNESDAY THIS 15^th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017

 

M/s. Nithya Industries,

Rep. by its Partner,

53, (L-12 Unit),

Ambattur Industrial Estate,

Chennai 600 058.                                        Complainant

                                         Vs

 

1.  The National Insurance Co Ltd.,

Rep. by its Manager,

Regd office.

No.3, Middleton Street,

Calcutta 700 071.

 

2. The National Insurance Co Ltd.,

Egmore Branch,

Rep. by its Manager,

No.37, Pantheon Road,

Chennai 600 088.                                        Opposite parties.

 

 

Counsel for Complainant         :   M/s. Prasanna Venkatesh & others          

Counsel for opposite parties    :   M/s. S.Vadivel & others.

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards sum assured as per the policy and also to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.10,000/- towards cost of the complaint.

 1. The averment of the complaint in brief are as follows:

         The complainant submit that  they are the manufacturers of Metal Labels, Name Plates, Dials etc and having Industry at Ambattur Industrial Estate, Chennai – 58.   The company availed insurance policy with the 2^nd opposite party bearing Policy No.500410/1999/750/838 and paid premium regularly.   On 2.5.2000 after completion of work at 7.p.m. the industry was closed and locked by Foreman.    On 3.5.2000 at 8.30 a.m it was noticed that the asbestos sheets in the roof was broken and a ladder was left standing till the roof level and approximately weighing 500 kgs raw materials of aluminium sheets finished goods, semi finished goods were found to be missing.   The estimated value of the material lost is about Rs.1,00,000/-.   Immediately on 3.5.2000 due police complaint was filed  before Ambattur Industrial Estate Police Station  and the same was registered as FIR No.185/2000.   The complainant made claim under the policy with the 2^nd opposite party and waited for the settlement of claim.   The opposite  parties directed the complainant to produce certain documents and based on the directions of the 2^nd opposite party had enclosed the FIR and other relevant documents for processing the claim of the complainant.   Even after repeated requests and demands and several letter addressed to the opposite parties there is no reply.     As such the act of  the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant.  Hence this complaint is filed.

2.    The brief averments in Written Version of  the  opposite parties is  as follows:

The  opposite parties deny each and every allegations except those that are specifically admitted herein.    The opposite parties submit that  if the opposite parties received any claim form the complainant in the proper form definitely the opposite parties must have processed the claim in accordance with the terms and conditions of the policy, if any issued to the complainant.    In this case the opposite parties had not received any claim from the complainant.     Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the  opposite parties and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.     In order to prove the averments of the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A8 marked.  Proof affidavit of opposite parties filed and Ex.B1 to Ex.B10 marked on the side of the  opposite parties.

4.   The points for the consideration is: 

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards the sum assured with interest  as prayed for ?

 

2. Whether the complainant is entitled a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.10000/- as prayed for?
5.  

 

          Both parties filed their written arguments.The complainant pleaded and contended that they are the manufacturers of Metal Labels, Name Plates, Dials etc and having Industry at Ambattur Industrial Estate, Chennai – 58.The company availed insurance policy with the 2^nd opposite party bearing Policy No.500410/1999/750/838 and paid premium regularly.On 2.5.2000 after completion of work at 7.p.m. the industry was closed and locked by Foreman.On 3.5.2000 at 8.30 a.m it was noticed that the asbestos sheets in the roof was broken and a ladder was left standing till the roof level and approximately weighing 500 kgs raw materials of aluminium sheets finished goods, semi finished goods were found to be missing.The estimated value of the material lost is about Rs.1,00,000/-.Immediately on 3.5.2000 due police complaint was filedbefore Ambattur Industrial Estate Police Stationand the same was registered as FIR No.185/2000. The complainant made claim under the policy with the 2^nd opposite party and waited for the settlement of claim.The oppositeparties directed the complainant to produce certain documents and based on the directions of the 2^nd opposite party had enclosed the FIR and other relevant documents for processing the claim of the complainant.But the complainant has not produced any such document to prove the due submission of claim form and documents.Further the complainant pleaded and contended that even after repeated requests and demands and several letter addressed to the opposite parties there is no reply.Hence the complainant issued legal notice to the opposite parties on 5.12.2010 for which the opposite parties sent reply Ex.B5 dated 25.1.2011. The opposite parties has neither settlement of claim nor repudiated the claim.Hence the complainant has filed this case claiming compensation and damages.But on a careful perusal of the records it is seen that this complaint is filed only on 18^th May 2011 after lapse of 10 years.The complainant has not explained the reason for inordinate delay in filing the complaint.Equally the complainant has not filed suitable application for condone delay in filing the complaint.

7.  
8.  
9.  
9.  
10. 2009) 7 Supreme Court Cases 768

KANDIMALLA RAGHAVAIAH AND COMPANY

•  

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY AND ANOHTER

 

Further the learned counsel for the opposite parties contended that the complainant suppressed the fact and material documents filed this case claiming imaginary amount.The complainant has not proved the alleged burglary by way of suitable document.The allegation in FIR also not proved.The complainant has not submitted any claim form with relevant document within 14 days of the incident to till date.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this forum is of the considered view that thecomplainant is not entitled for any relief as prayed for in the complaint and the point is answered accordingly. 

            In the result the complaint is dismissed.  No cost

          Dictated by the President to the Assistant, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 15^th day  of  November 2017.  

 

 MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s side documents:

Ex.A1-  23.8.1999 - Copy of the policy issued by the opposite party.

Ex.A2- 3.5.2000    - Copy of the letter given to Police Station.

Ex.A3- 3.5.2000    - Copy of the FIR.

Ex.A4- 9.9.2008    - Copy of the letter given to the 2^nd opp. party.

Ex.A5- 27.5.2009  - Copy of legal notice.

Ex.A6- 5.12.2010  - Copy of reminder notice.

Ex.A7- 28.2.2011  - Copy of the reminder notice.

Ex.A8                    - Copy of the Ack. Card.

Opposite parties’ side document: -   

 

Ex.B1-                 - Copy of Burglary and Housing Breaking Policy.

Ex.B2- 5.12.2010  - Copy of Complainant Advocate notice.

Ex.B3- 12.1.2011  - Copy of telegram.

Ex.B4- 12.1.2011  - Copy of Postal receipt.

Ex.B5- 25.1.2011  - Copy of reply notice.

Ex.B6- 7.2.2011    - Copy of Ack. Card.

Ex.B7-                - Copy of proof of delivery

Ex.B8- 28.2.2011  - Copy of notice by the complainant advocate

Ex.B9- 22.3.2011  - Copy of Reply by 2^nd opp. party.

Ex.B10- 24.3.2011         - Copy of Ack. Card.

 

 

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.