ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD vs SANJEEV SOOD

THIS appeal has been directed against the order of the District Forum, Solan, dated 21.2.1997 whereby the appellants/opposite parties (hereinafter to be referred to as the Insurance Company) have been directed to pay to the respondent/ complainant (hereinafter to be referred to as the complainant) a sum of Rs. 29,847/- as compensation alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from the date of the filing the complaint till the date of payment and Rs. 1,000/-as cost of litigation.

THE admitted relevant facts of the case are that the complainant who is the sole proprietor of M/s. Ankush Casting,4 Industrial Area, Baddi, District Solan, had admittedly obtained a fire policy (Schedule C) from the Insurance Company for the period from 11.6.1993 to 10.6.1994. THEre is no dispute that the policy was scheduled as Fire Policy-C and the property insured was the building above plinth level of M/s. Ankush Casting, Plot No. 4, Industrial Area, Baddi and the policy was also further extended to cover the risk of flood, storm and earthquake. THEre is no further dispute that due to storm the loss to the aforesaid building of the complainant was caused and a claim of Rs. 1,02,100/- was preferred by the complainant with the Insurance Company. THE Surveyor Shri B.K. Sharma who was appointed by the Insurance Company, has assessed the loss at Rs.29,847/-. However, the Surveyor Shri B.K. Sharma recommended the claim of Rs. 4,847/-, as according to him, the damage upto Rs. 25,000/- was not payable to the complainant in terms of the clause of the insurance policy. Incidentally we may point out that first loss of Rs. 2.500/- is excluded and not Rs. 25,000/- as stated by the Surveyor. At any rate, this will not have bearing on the case. Mr, Rajeev Mehta, learned Counsel for the Insurance Company has raised two contentions. The first contention is that the risk covered under the policy is in respect of the building above plinth level on plot No. 4 of M/s. Ankush Casting at Industrial Area, Baddi, but the damage in fact was caused to the labour quarters of M/s. Ankush Casting.

It may be noticed that the policy has been taken in respect of the building above plinth level of M/s. Ankush Casting on plot No. 4 and there is no distinction or exclusion in respect of any labour quarters etc. pertaining to M/s. Ankush Casting which were situated on plot No. 4 itself. Since the labour quarters are also on Plot No. 4 which has been insured under the insurance policy, the contention of the Counsel for the Insurance Company cannot be accepted and the District Forum has rightly held that even the labour quarters are also covered under the insurance policy.

THE next contention of Mr. Mehta, Counsel for the appellant is that the entire amount of Rs. 29,847/- should not have been awarded in favour of the complainant by the District Forum, as according to the exclusion clause of insurance policy, Rs. 25,000/- should have been deducted from such amount and Rs. 4,847/- should have been awarded by the District Forum as assessed by the Surveyor Shri B.K. Sharma. In order to appreciate the contention of the Counsel for the appellant, we may refer to exclusion Clause (a) under heading "EXCLUSIONS" of the insurance policy, which may be quoted as under : "This Insurance does not cover : (a) THE first Rs. 2,500/- of each and every loss in respect of which the insured is indemnified by this policy. This excess is applicable per event per insured."

We are afraid the interpretation given by the Surveyor and attempted to be given by the Insurance Company is wholly incorrect and cannot be accepted. A bare perusal of exclusion clause would reveal that the insurance will not cover the first Rs. 2,500/- of each and every loss in respect of which the insured is indemnified by this policy. No such exclusion has been made in respect of Rs. 25,000/- as per the exclusions given in the policy. This exclusion of Rs. 2,500/- would apply in case the total loss docs not exceed Rs. 2,500/-. Since the loss or the damage assessed is more man Rs. 2,500/-, this clause will not apply and the District Forum has rightly held so. No interference is called for. In the light of what is discussed above, there is no merit in this appeal and the appeal is accordingly dismissed. Appeal dismissed.