V.G.K.FOUNDRY vs Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

THIS is a complaint under Section 17 read with Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

THE insurance company denied that the vehicle was lost on account of theft or burglary. THE occurrence was not intimated immediately. THE surveyor appointed by the insurer arrived at the conclusion that the loss was not due to any theft. THE complainant failed to produce the No Objection Certificate from the financier, State Bank and hence the claim could not be settled. According to the opposite party though the vehicle was insured for Rs. 3 lakhs, its market value is something between Rs. 2 lakhs and Rs, 2,20,000/-, as assessed by an independent surveyor. The complainant is a proprietary concern and is the owner of a brand-new DC Toyota vehicle. It was insured with the opposite party for a sum of Rs. 3 lakhs for the period from 16.11.90 to 15.11.91. On the night of 6/7.4.91, there was burglary in the complainant''s factory in which some persons forcibly entered into the premises of the complainant, beat up the watchman, broke open the office room and drove away the vehicle. The matter was reported to the Police and a claim was preferred with the opposite party. The police closed the case as ''undetected'' and a certificate was issued to that effect. The opposite party failed to settle the claim. Hence this complaint.

Exhibits A-1 to A-20 and B-1 to B-8 are marked. No oral evidence has been let in.

IT is not in dispute that the complainant''s vehicle TCM Toyota bearing registration No. TN-37-B-1636 was insured with the opposite party. Exhibit A-1 is the policy of insurance for a sum of Rs. 3 lakhs. IT is the case of the complainant that on the night of 6/7.4.91 there was a burglary in the factory in which this vehicle has been stolen away. Exhibit A-10 is the copy of the First Information Report laid with the Police on 7.4.91. The Police have enquired into the matter and Exhibit A-5, is the letter dated 14.11.91 of the Inspector of Police, Peelamedu Crimes, The Police found that inspite of all possible efforts, there was no clue or useful information and the case was therefore closed as undetected. The opposite party denied that there was any theft or burglary. But there is no reason to doubt be complaint given by the complainant under Exhibit A-10 or the investigation held by the Police who have ultimately come to the conclusion that the case is undetectable. The surveyor appointed by the Insurance Company whose report is marked as Exhibit B-5 has come to the conclusion that the vehicle was forcibly taken by persons whom the watchman could not identify. The complainant Mr. Viswanathan has also filed an affidavit about the burglary committed in his factory on the night of 6/7.4.91. Takingall these facts into consideration, we hold that the vehicle has been lost by burglary and theft. There is no dispute that the policy of insurance covers burglary and theft and the complainant is therefore entitled to claim compensation from the opposite party. According to the opposite party the maket value of the vehicle is between Rs. 2 lakhs and Rs. 2,20,000/-. When the vehicle is lost by theft or burglary, it is difficult to assess the market value of that vehicle, which depends upon various factors such as its age, maintenance, condition of the engine, battery, mileage done etc., and these factors differ from one vehicle to another. The vehicle has been insured for Rs. 3 lakhs on 16.11,90 and this occurrence has taken place on the night of 6.4.91, within a period of 5 months. In M.V. Abdul Gafur v. Senior Manager, United India Insurance Company (1991-2-MWN-CP-222), this Commission has held that though the policy amount is the estimate given by the owner, in as much as that estimate is acceptable by the insurance company and a premium has been collected thereon, it is not open to the insurer to go behind the valuation given in the policy. The same principle applies here also and we hold that the insured value of Rs. 3 lakhs has to be taken as market value.

THE occurrence has taken place with in 5 months there from and under the policy of insurance no depreciation can be claimed up to 6 months. THE opposite party is therefore bound to pay the entire sum of Rs. 3 lakhs with interest thereon from the date of the claim till payment. In the result we direct the opposite party to pay to the complainant Rs. 3 lakhs with interest thereon at 18% from the date of the claim till payment, and costs of Rs. 1,000/-. Complaint allowed with costs.