Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member

          It is the case relating to alleged deficiency in service on the part of O.P./Insurance Company (hereinafter referred to as ‘Insurance Company’) for repudiating insurance claim.

          Undisputed facts are that the complainant is insured by the Insurance Company under ‘Jewellers Block Policy’ which was valid for period midnight from 12/10/2006 to 11/10/2007.  Said policy document is at Annexure-1.  It is alleged by the complainant that in normal course of his business, the complainant imports rough diamonds at his Mumbai office and sent the same to Surat office for processing work.  Complainant on 30/04/2007 around 6.45 p.m. at Surat factory as per daily routine work kept 423.16 carats of polished diamonds for cleaning in machine after pouring acid in the beaker.   The process of polishing was expected to take almost took 2 hours for cleaning process.  After 2 hours, said machine used to stop automatically.  After putting the diamonds for polishing, Mukeshbhai left the place around 7.50 p.m. for dinner.  Watchman heard a loud sound coming from the room where the polishing process was going on.  Watchman informed Mr.Mukeshbhai, who after informing the partner of the complainant Mr.Rasikbhai Gajera immediately rushed to the premises.  He found that there was explosion and in the said explosion lid of the machine was blown up and loss occurred to the diamonds.  The loss was assessed to `49,87,910/-.  Insurance claim was lodged.  Surveyor visited the site and submitted his report.  The Insurance Company repudiated the claim pointing out that the explosion in question which occurred during the process of cleaning and polishing diamonds is not covered under the insurance policy and repudiated the claim.  Feeling aggrieved thereby, this consumer complaint was filed on 01/04/2008.

          O.P./Insurance Company disputed the claim as per their written version dated 27/02/2009 and pointing out the clauses of the insurance policy submitted that their repudiation on the ground mentioned earlier was proper and justified and hence, they have not committed any deficiency in service.  It also pointed out that Mr.Mukeshbhai leaving the cleaning process apparatus unattended, as done in the instant case, was also not proper.

          We heard Ms.Rashmi Manne, Advocate Proxy for Mr.U.B. Wavikar, Advocate for the complainant and Mr.Chandani, Advocate for the O.P.

          Survey/Investigation Report of the Surveyor dated 31/05/2007 is on record at Exhibit-A.  Said Survey Report is not in dispute.  The policy in question Annexure-1 is also not in dispute.  Exclusion clause in the policy reads as under :-

“ PROVIDED ALWAYS THAT the Company shall not be liable for under this Policy in respect of :

1)      Loss of and/or damage of the property insured which may be sustained whilst the same is being actually worked upon or from any process of cleaning, repairing or restoring and directly resulting therefrom.”

          There is no evidence adduced and only a bare statement is made to the effect that there was an explosion and the reason for said explosion is also not mentioned.  Even if it is an explosion within meaning of Section (1) of the policy, still since said explosion had occurred when the cleaning process of the diamond was going on, it comes under the exception, supra.  Therefore, repudiation of the insurance claim by the Insurance Company cannot be faulted with.  Certainly the Insurance Company cannot be held guilty for any deficiency in service in repudiating the insurance claim.  We hold accordingly and pass the following order:-

                   -: ORDER :-

1.       Complaint stands dismissed.

2.       In the given circumstances, parties to bear their own cots.

3.       Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.