HIND CONSTRUCTION CO. vs National Insurance Company Ltd.

IN view of the consensual relief being accorded hereinafter to the parties it seems unnecessary to delve deeply into the facts. It suffices to mention that the complainant firm M/s. Hind Construction Company had taken out insurance fire policy ''C'' of the National INsurance Company for their premises, machinery, and stock etc. lying at their premises to the extent of Rs. 7,40,000/-. The risk covered included damage by flood or rains and it is their case that on the 9th of September, 1990 there was heavy rain at Ambala which resulted in a loss of Rs. 2,37,961.25P due to building collapse and damage to office and store block machinery and stocks. The matter was reported to the insuring company who appointed surveyors to assess the loss. But thereafter it is the allegation that there was gross delay in the settlement of the claim and consequently the relief for the payment of the claim of the aforementioned amount of money together with interest @ 18% annum from 9th of September, 1990 was sought.

IN the written statement on behalf of the National INsurance Company the factum of the insurance policy having been taken out was admitted and further that on the receipt of the information about the flood and damage M/s. Kumar Raj and Associates surveyors and chartered accountants were appointed to assess the loss. The said surveyor vide their report dated the 4th of March, 1991 (Annexure R-l to the written statement) assesses the loss to the tune of Rs. 20,768/- only. According to the opposite party the complainant was required to sent a flood certificate from the office of the Deputy Commissioner, but he only submitted a certificate from the Municipal Commissioner, Ambala. Consequently because of the absence of the submission of the flood certificate from the district authorities the claim was treated as no claim and the file of the complainant was closed. IN any case, it was the stand that the liability of the INsurance Company could not be beyond the assessed loss by the surveyor to the tune of Rs. 20,768/-. The complaint was seriously contested on behalf of the opposite party and the complainants apart from the documents relied upon (the authenticity of which was not disputed) adduced the evidence of Shri Arunesh Agarwal, Shri Dinesh Kant Jindal and Shri R.R. Sharma in support of their case. All these deponents were cross-examined at considerable length on behalf of the opposite party.

In rebuttal apart from documentary evidence the opposite party placed on record the affidavits of Dr. S.M. Sehgal, Senior Divisional Manager, Shri Raj Bhola, Chartered Accountant, who were cross-examined extensively by the learned Counsel for the complainant.

THE case being ripe for arguments, the same were heard on the 9th of March, 1992. During the course thereof Shri L.M. Suri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Pardeep Bedi, Advocate for the opposite party very fairly took up the stand that the Insurance Company would not wish to totally repudiate the insurance claim and were willing to pay the loss as assessed by the surveyor. Consequently the respective stand of the learned Counsel for the parties were recorded as under:- "After some arguments on behalf of the complainant has been heard, Mr. L.M. Suri very fairly stated on behalf of the Insurance Company that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case they would not wish to totally repudiate the insurance claim. It was also undertaken that the Insurance Company would abide by the report of the Surveyor Kumar Raj and Associates annexed to the written statement and pay the claim to the tune of Rs. 20,768/- as assessed therein within one month''s time from today. In view of the above Mr. Anil Sharma also agreed that if the amount aforesaid is not totally acceptable to his clients then under Clause 8 of the fire policy ''C governing the parties, arbitration would be. sought by the complainant in accordance therewith, if so advised."

It is common ground that the fire policy ''C governing the parties contains an arbitration provision in Clause 8 thereof in all cases where the liability being otherwise admitted, any difference arises as to the quantum thereof. In accordance with the statement of the learned Counsel on behalf of the parties it is directed that the National Insurance Company would pay the sum of Rs. 20,768/- as assessed by M/s Kumar Raj and Associate to the complainant within one month from the date of this order. In the event of the said amount being not totally acceptable to the complainants then in compliance with Clause 8 the arbitration proceedings could be taken out with regard to the difference pertaining, to the quantum of the claim to be paid by the Insurance Company.

THE complaint is allowed in terms aforesaid. THE Insurance Company shall pay the amount aforesaid to the complainants within the time prescribed, failing which complaint would be enforced under Section 27 of the Act. THE parties will however, bear their own costs. Complaint allowed.