Per Shri Dhanraj Khamatkar, Hon’ble Member
This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 03/03/1999 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pune in consumer complaint No.539/1993.
2. The facts leading to this appeal can be summerised as under :-
The complainant had taken an insurance policy from the opponent/Insurance Company in respect of stock and materials in its shop styled as ‘M/s.Shrinath Electronics”. The period of insurance policy was from 17/10/1989 to 16/10/1990. He had deposited the required premium for the policy. On 25/12/1989 there was fire in the premises of the shop. The complainant called the Fire Brigade and informed the Insurance Company and Police authority. He had filed claim amounting to `1,80,000/- on 15/11/1989 with the opponent/Insurance Company. The opponent/Insurance Company had repudiated the claim on the ground that the claim is false one. The complainant approached to the Higher Authority of opponent/Insurance Company. However, they have not taken any decision and hence, he filed consumer complaint praying to direct the opponent/Insurance Company to pay an amount of `2 Lakhs towards loss of furniture, fixtures, and electronics items and spare parts, to pay an amount of `1,29,000/- for not settling the claim within reasonable period along with costs of the proceeding.
3. The opponent/Insurance Company contested the complaint. The opponent/Insurance Company admitted the policy and the incident of fire during the period of policy. They contended that they have appointed a Surveyor for conducting assessment of the losses. They have further contended that one of the conditions of the policy is that if any fraudulent means are used, the Insurance Company shall forfeit all the benefits due under the policy and accordingly, after examining the report of the Surveyor, they have repudiated the claim. Therefore, opponent/Insurance Company prayed that complaint be dismissed.
4. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum after going through the complaint, written version of the opponent, evidence filed by both the parties on affidavits and pleadings of the Advocates, arrived at the conclusion that the Insurance Company/opponent rightly repudiated the claim and dismissed the complaint. It is against this order that the present appeal is filed.
5. Appellant and his Counsel remained absent in spite of service. On behalf of respondent/Insurance Company Advocate Mr.R.P. Bafna was present. In absence of appellant, we proceed to decide the appeal on merits.
6. Admittedly, appellant had taken insurance policy from the opponent/Insurance Company and the insurance period was from 17/10/1989 to 16/10/1990. The respondent/opponent has admitted the incident of fire on 25/12/1989. Accordingly, the appellant had filed insurance claim. Respondent/opponent has appointed a Surveyor on 22/08/1990 and the Surveyor assessed the claim filed by the appellant. Again the respondent/Insurance Company had appointed second Surveyor. He also assessed the loss.
7. We have gone through the letter of repudiation sent by respondent/Insurance Company. The letter disclosed the grounds on which the claim is repudiated. In a Survey Report, the Surveyor has observed that, “we have thoroughly investigated said claim and assessed the loss as ‘Nil’ as the bills produced are not genuine”. The insurance is a contract and it is based on the utmost good faith between the parties. The Surveyor has observed that the claim filed by the appellant is fraudulent claim and hence, the respondent has repudiated the claim. We do not find any substance in the appeal filed by the appellant/org. complainant and hence, we pass the following order :-
-: ORDER :-
1. Appeal is dismissed.
2. The order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum is hereby confirmed.
3. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.
Pronounced
Dated 21st February 2012.
