DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD
Dated this the 21st day of October, 2022
Present : Sri.Vinay Menon V., President
: Smt.Vidya A., Member Date of Filing: 24/05/2019
CC/165/2019
Muhammed Ashraf Ali,
S/o.Kunhi Pokku Musaliyar,
Koonathil House,
V.K. Kadavu, Thrithala - Complainant
(Managing Partner of M/s.Koonathil Stores,
Thrithala, Pattambi)
(By Adv.Praveen Raj V.)
Vs
The New India Assurance Co.Ltd.
Pattambi Branch Office,
Ammu Building, Kalpaka Street,
Mele Pattambi, Kerala – 679 303 - Opposite party
(By Adv. T.P.George)
O R D E R
By Sri. Vinay Menon V., President
- Complainant is the proprietor of Koonathil Stores, carrying out grocery sales in Room no. 1/617 (New no. 2/827), Thrithala, Pattambi. Since loading and un-loading to the aforesaid room was difficult, the complainant had taken rooms bearing door nos. 2/111 and 2/112 as well on rent. Said rooms were at a distance of 250 meters away from Room no. 1/617 (2/827). Merchandize/Stock in trade of the complainant was insured with the opposite party under Standard Fire and Special Peril Insurance Policy. On 15/08/2016, a torrential rain caused inundation of river Nila and flooding of the ware house, destroying rice worth Rs. 44,250/- beyond salvage.
Claim of the complainant before the opposite party was repudiated on the ground “the insured premises are not flood affected”. Aggrieved thereby, this complaint is filed seeking an order directing the opposite party to indemnify the complainant and for incidental and ancillary reliefs.
- The opposite party denied their liability to indemnify the complainant as the premises shown in the proposal form and in the policy document issued thereof was for the property and merchandise in Door no. 1/617(presently 2/827). Insured premises and stock therein was intact. Eventhough stock in door nos. 2/111 and 2/112 suffered damages, the said premises were not insured or under coverage. Hence the opposite party sought for dismissal of complaint.
- On a perusal of the pleadings, the following issues arise for consideration:
1. Whether the complainant is entitled to indemnification by the opposite party?
3. Whether there is any deficiency in service / unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party?
4. Whether the complainant is entitled to any reliefs as sought for?
6. Reliefs, if any ?
4. Evidence comprised of oral evidence of witness for complainant (PW1) and Exts. A1 to A9 as documentary evidence. Opposite parties marked Exts. B1 to B5.
Issue No. 1
5. The only question that needs to be answered is whether the opposite party is bound to indemnify the complainant on the basis of Ext. B1 policy. The relevant terms and conditions to decide the aforesaid question are appraised hereinbelow.
a. As per Clause 5: Policy Level Covers of Policy certificate, Description of property and risk description are ‘As per Block Details’.
b. Clause 6: Block Details of Policy certificate, show location address as “1/617, Thrithala Rd, Palakkad – 679534, NA, KL 1621, Thrithala, KL, Kerala, India.”
c. Clause 6(a): Block: of Policy certificate, show Name of Block as “Stocks at 1/617, Thritala Road, Palakkad – 679534.” Asset Description 6 in this clause is “On Stock held in trust”.
d. In A) GENERAL EXCLUSIONS of Terms and Conditions, Clause 13 reads as follows:
“13. Loss or damage to property insured if removed to any building or place other than in which it is herein stated to be insured except machinery and equipment temporarily removed for repairs, cleaning, renovation or other similar purposes for a period not exceeding 60 days.”
6. A reading of Ext. B1 would show that what is insured is the properties of the complainant, held in trust, kept in 1/617, Thrithala Road, Palakkad. No other properties or premises are shown insured.
The general exclusions also bar by clear wordings that the insured property would lose cover of policy if it is removed to any building or place other than in which it is stated to be insured and the Company will not be liable to indemnify the losses.
That being so, the duty and liability of the Insurer is limited to indemnification of losses that may befall to the stock in trade mentioned and kept in location stated in Block in Ext. B1.
7. The complainant has no case that the stock in trade in insured premises was destroyed. Destruction occurred solely to goods maintained in Door nos. in 2/111 and 2/112, which are not insured.
8. In the facts and circumstances of the case herein, we find that there is no ambiguity in the terms and conditions of Ext. B1 policy certificate and terms and conditions. Terms and conditions therein can be safely resorted to for adjudication of the dispute. We need not look further or dig deeper. Repudiation of the claim of the complainant was in accordance with the terms and conditions of Ext. B1.
Issue No.2
9. In view of the aforesaid findings we hold that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party in repudiating the claim of the complainant. Complaint is dismissed.
Issue Nos. 3 & 4
10. Apropos the findings and conclusion above, the complainant is not entitled to any of the reliefs sought for. Parties are directed to suffer their respective costs.
Pronounced in open court on this the 21st day of October, 2022.
Sd/-
Vinay Menon V
President
Sd/-
Vidya.A
Member
APPENDIX
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant
Ext.A1 – Copy of Standard Fire & Special Perils Policy certificate.
Ext.A2 - Copy of inspection certificate bearing No.NI/Fire/1261/18 dtd.25/9/2018
Ext.A3 – Copy of repudiation letter bearing ref.No.NIA/OTP/misc Claims / 2018-19
dt.12/10/18
Ext.A4 – Copy of rent agreement dated 28/5/2018
Ext.A5 (a) –Copy of tax invoice bearing No.A111 dt.4/7/18
Ext.A5(b) – Copy of Lorry freight letter dt.4/7/18
Ext.A6 (a) –Original of lorry receipt dated 7/8/18 for consignment worth Rs.9,000/-
Ext.A6(b) – Original of lorry receipt dated 7/8/18 for consignment worth Rs.6,000/-
Ext.A6(c) – Original bill of supply bearing No.0347 dt.7/8/18
Ext.A6(d) – Copy of A6(c) issued to transporter
Ext.A7 (a) – Original lorry voucher dated 6/8/18
Ext.A7(b) – Original of bill of supply bearing No.208 dt.6/8/18
Ext.A7(c) – Duplicate of Ext.A7(b)
Ext.A8 – Original of bill of supply bearing No.GRT/18-19/00000009 dt.4/8/18
Ext.A9 (a) – Original LR for bill bearing No.193 dt.6/7/18
Ext.A9(b) - Original bill bearing No.193 dt.6/7/18
Ext.A9(c) - - do –
Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite party
Ext.B1 – Copy of Ext.A1 alongwith terms and conditions
Ext.B2- Original Fire insurance claim form dated 21/8/18
Ext.B3 – Original proposal for standard fire and special perils policy
Ext.B4 – Copy of Ext.A3 alongwith acknowledgment card and Postal receipt
Ext.B5 – Same as Ext.A2
Court Exhibit : Nil
Third party documents: Nil
Witness examined on the side of the complainant
PW1 – Muhammed Ali
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party
Nil
Court Witness
Nil
NB : Parties are directed to take back all extra set of documents submitted in the proceedings in accordance with Regulation 20(5) of the Consumer Protection (Consumer Commission Procedure) Regulations, 2020 failing which they will be weeded out.
