SOMESH READYMADE GARMENT vs NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY

THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 22.4.1997 whereby the complaint filed by the appellant has been dismissed with a direction that since the dispute involves complex and complicated questions of fact and law it should seek its remedy through appropriate Civil Court.

WE heard the learned Counsels for the parties and have perused the material available on the record. Undisputed facts of the case are that the appellant is running his business of readymade garments under the name and title of Somesh Readymade Garment, Bharatpur. Not only the goods but also the furniture and building premises of the appellant were insured by the respondent through three insurance policies the duration of which were from 21.1.1995 to 20.1.1996, 15.7.1995 to 14.7.1996 and 17.7.1995 to 16.7.1996 for an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/-, Rs. 1,00,000/- and Rs. 60,000/- respectively.

A fire took place on 4.8.1995 causing loss and damage not only to the goods but also the premises and furniture kept therein. When a claim was advanced by the appellant with the Insurance Company it appointed a Surveyor but instead of the claim advanced by the appellant the respondent company admitted the claim of the appellant only to the extent of Rs. 17,793/-, that too with respect to the damage caused to the building but did not allow the claim in respect of the furniture, fittings and goods stock in trade. The appellant approached the Forum which after consideration of the material placed by both the parties came to the conclusion that it is a complex and complicated matter to be investigated and decided by an appropriate Civil Court.

WE have given due thought and consideration to the material available on the record. From a perusal of the material available on the record it is made out that looking to the evidence and material placed before the Forum it cannot be categorised as a case of complex and complicated nature. When both the parties have placed all the relevant record and material before the Forum, it should have decided the dispute on merits in which it has failed. Consequently it is a fit case where it is necessary that the Forum should re-hear the matter afresh and decide it on merits after affording opportunities to both the parties to be heard. Consequently, the impugned order of the Forum dated 22.4.1997 is set aside and the complaint is remanded to the Forum with a direction to decide the complaint on merits after affording due opportunity to both the parties within a period of three months from the date of appearance of the parties before it. Parties are directed to appear before the District Forum on 16.1.2004. Appeal allowed.