BEFORE THE A.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION:HYDERABAD.
FA.No.834 OF 2007 AGAINST C.D.NO.133 OF 2005GUNTUR.
Between:
Gayatri Cotton Traders,
Kurnuthala, Vatticherukuru Mandal,
Guntur Dist.,
Rep. by its partner,
Sri N.Gowrishankar.
1. The Branch Manager,
Guntur.
2. The Regional Manager,
Paradise,
3. The Chairman & Managing Director,
IndiaAssuranceBuilding,
Counsel for the Appellant
Counsel for the Respondents:Kota
MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER,
TWO THOUSAND EIGHT
Oral Order :
Guntur, the complainant preferred this appeal.
The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant is carrying on cotton business of buying cotton Kappas, gin and press them and sell all forms of cotton products under the name of M/s.Gayatri Cotton Traders, having principal place of business at Kurnoothala, Vatticherukuru Mandal, Guntur District. 8-5-2002 the stocks are cotton only and stated that incase of fully pressed bales at least, iron bale hoops will remain as salvage. 21-8-2002
The complainant submitted that he purchased cotton stocks of MCU variety from M/s.V.Ramarao Cotton Ginning Mill under various lots and under various invoices on different dates on credit basis and purchased stock worth Rs.14,85,238/- and the same were kept in Sri Srinivasa Pressing Company Pvt. Ltd. and paid the necessary market fee to the Agricultural Mandal Committee and obtained necessary permit for the transactions.
Opposite parties filed counter stating that the claim of the complainant is not genuine one as there were no stocks of the complainant in the premises of Sri Srinivasa Pressing Company Pvt. Ltd. at the time of fire accident and they after careful consideration of all relevant aspects have rightly repudiated the claim of the complainant.
Based on the evidence adduced i.e. Exs.A1 to A18 and the pleadings put forward, dismissed the complaint.
Aggrieved by the said order, the complainant preferred this appeal.
The learned counsel for the appellant/complainant submitted that the District Forum erred in holding that the complainant is not a ‘consumer’ he submitted that the complainant renewed the policy for Rs.30,00,000/- and paid the premium of Rs.5,328/- and that there was no dispute about the fire accident.
We have perused the material on record.
The facts not in dispute are that the complainant insured stocks of cotton located on various godowns under a single policy No.621001/11/20015895 for a period of 6.11.2001 to 5.5.2002 and again extended the policy upto 5.6.2002 without break in insurance coverage.
While the material on record does not dispute the fire accident it is main contention of the opposite eparty that stocks in Sri Srinivasa Pressing Company Pvt. Ltd., at the time of fire accident does not belong to the complainant and therefore the repudation is justified. did not file any documents to substantiate his contention.
The total stock of 166 FP bales lying at Sri Srinivasa Cotton Pressing Co., Pvt. Ltd., are claimed to be totally lost in fire and no salvage available except burnt bale hoops.
Value of 166 FP bales
Loss on application of average Rs.15,42,921 X 0.661152
Ex.A14 is the assessment dated 3.2.2004 While we observe that the surveyor himself in Ex.A10 has assessed the loss at Rs.10,10,105.30 taking into consideration the various stocks as aforementioned the contention of the learned counsel for the complainant that there were two policies Exs.A3 and A4 and Ex.A3 refers to policy period 25.4.2002 to 24.5.2002 for an amount of RS.20 lakhs and the policy no.621001/11/02/00360 and Ex.A4 refers to policy No.621001/11/02/00385 for an amount of Rs.30 lakhs. Thereafter the surveyor at page 6 of his survey report has taken into consideration only one policy of an amount of RS.30 lakhs and stated that there is an under insurance since the insured was holding a stock of RS.45,35,533.50 and deducted the underinsurance amount of 33.88478%. The complainant himself has sought for the claim amount of Rs.15 lakhs in his legal notice dated 12.4.2004 which is Ex.A11.
