National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Dina Nath Ganjoo

M.M. Kumar, C.J.—This appeal has been preferred by the National Insurance Company Limited by invoking Section 17 of the Jammu and

Kashmir Consumer Protection Act, 1987 and is directed against order dated 06-09-2010 passed by the J & K State Consumer Disputes

Redressal Commission, Jammu (for brevity 'the Commission'). The Commission has allowed the claim filed by the consumer-respondent. The

consumer-respondent was forced to flee away from his home and hearth. He migrated to Jammu and as a migrant he got his residential house

along with attic and household articles lying therein insured with the appellant-company under the 'standard fire and perils policy'. The same

continued in operation from the year starting from 1998 to 2005. The case of the consumer-respondent has been found to be genuine as Police

Station Bijbehara has suo motu accepted the incident whereby the house was damaged by miscreants and FIR 15/2001 was registered u/s 436,

RPC. The Commission has disregarded the report given by M/s. Wullar Investigators because it was proved on the record that insured house

belonging to the consumer-respondent had suffered loss on 15-01-2001 and assessment was made by Surveyor, namely, Sai Consultant, which

assessed the loss to the tune of Rs. 4,60,653.00 after visiting the spot and after making enquiries about the incident, as is revealed from the report

itself. The argument that Sai Consultant was not authorised surveyor has been rejected by the Commission on the ground that the appellant had

itself appointed Sai Consultant. The Commission was not apprised of any record to show that Sai Consultant was not a qualified assessor and

surveyor. Accordingly the report submitted by M/s. Wullar Investigators was rejected holding that without any basis or cause the genuine claim of

the consumer-respondent had been repudiated by M/s. Wullar Investigators.

On the basis of the findings that the building belonging to the consumer-respondent has suffered damage, the Commission accepted the report of

Sai Consultant and directed the appellant to make the payment of Rs. 4,60,653.00 along with interest at the rate of 8% per annum after two

months from the date of receipt of report of Sai Consultant till final payment is made. The litigation charges of Rs. 5000/- have also been awarded.

The Commission also awarded an amount of Rs. 40,000/- as damages for the tortuous act of the appellant-company, which after due enquiry, was

to be recovered from the concerned official/officials from his/her pay or pensionary benefits, as the case may be.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties at a considerable length and find that the report of Sai Consultant has been rightly made the basis

for awarding compensation. It is a proved fact that the accident took place and it was covered by the insurance policy. There is ample support

from the record of the police in the shape of FIR. The compensation other than the loss assessed has rightly been awarded as damages for the

tortuous act of the appellant. Accordingly, we find no room for admission of the appeal. As a sequel to the above discussion the appeal fails and

the same is dismissed.