Shri J.Sangma, President – The Complainant is a dealer in lime. He insured another part of his stock-in-trade with the Defendant for Rs.6,00,000/-. The policy No.13801/01/00532 was valid upto 9-9-91.

 

On the night of 20-5-91 a fire broke out and gutted the entire stock. The defendant appointed Shri.K.L.Jitani as Surveyor to asses the loss. The Complainant then filed his claim for Rs.6,00,000/- before the Surveyor stating that he suffered total loss. Alleging that after a delay for 3 years the defendant paid only Rs.4,73,130/-. He filed this complaint on 4-6-94 for giving him the balance amount of Rs.1,26,870/- with interest on Rs.6,00,000/-, etc. The total amount claimed is Rs.8,64,639/-.

 

In the counter affidavit the defendant contested the claim on three grounds : (1) That the Complainant took one year ten months in furnishing necessary papers to Surveyor. (2) After getting report from the Surveyor the defendant at first offered Rs.3,91,578/- as against Rs.6,00,000/- ; The Complainant along with his banker (Syndicate bank) have received the revised amount in full discharge of the claim without protest.

 

In the reply affidavit the complainant virtually admitted his delay for 1 year 10 months. He did not deny that he along with his banker received Rs.5,73,730/- in full discharge of the claim without protest.

 

Mr.S.P.Sharma stated that the complainant in fact furnished all papers within 6(six) months; so the admission on 1 year 10 months was through inadvertence. He prayed for direction to pay the balance amount and for interest on Rs.6,00,000/-. He submits that even if the person had received without protest, he can file complaint for interest on account of delay. To support this point he relied on Sachanand Verus New India Insurance Company, 1995(1) CPR 79. True there it was held that even if a person received the amount without protest he can bring complaint if the payment was made with duress and coercion. But there the complainant made clear allegation of duress and coercion and convinced the state Commission. In the instant case no such allegation has been made against the defendant. So the decision does not help the contention.

 

In this case there is no dispute that the Surveyor in his report noted that the loss was total and recommended payment of the insured amount in full. In the processing the defendant at first offered the claim at Rs.4,73,170/- ; but when the claimant’s banker also made claim they revised the amount to Rs.5,73,730/- and paid this amount. We direct the defendant to pay the balance amount of Rs.26,260/- to the complainant.

 

With the above direction the complaint is rejected.