State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Kamal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., ... vs M/S.Pratik Watch Co. And Another on 11 November, 2008
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION MAHARASHTRA STATE, MUMBAI FIRST APPEAL NO.227 OF 2008 Date of filing : 13/02/2008 IN CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.83/2007 Date of order : 11/11/2008 DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM, RAIGAD @ MISC.APPLICATION NO.355 OF 2008 Chairman/Manager Kamal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Alibag Branch at Mahad, H.O., District Raigad .Appellant/org.O.P.no.2 v/s. 1. M/s.Pratik Watch Co. Through its Proprietor Shri Kishore Bhikaji Sarkale R/o.Lions Club Building Shop no.4, Mahad District Raigad Respondent/org.complainant 2. Manager The New India Insurance Co.Ltd. 2883, Mahad branch Vasant Date Road, At Mahad District Raigad Respondent/org.O.P.no.1 Corum: Shri P.N.Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member
Smt.S.P.Lale, Honble Member Present : Mr.Sachin Chavan-Advocate for the appellant Mr.Sandeep Koregave-Advocate for respondent no.1 Mrs.Kalpana Trivedi-Advocate for respondent no.2 O R A L O R D E R Per Shri P.N.Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member
1. Being aggrieved by the judgement and award passed by District Consumer Forum, Raigad, in consumer complaint no.83/2007 dated 14/1/2008, whereby while allowing the complaint, Forum below directed original O.P.no.2- Credit Society to pay sum of Rs.2 lakhs with interest @ 8% p.a. and to pay compensation of Rs.3000/- for mental agony and Rs.1000/- by way of cost to the complainant, original O.P.no.2/Credit Society has filed this appeal. Briefly case of the parties may be stated as under:-
2. Complainant Shri Kishore Bhikaji Sarkale is a Proprietor of M/s. Pratik Watch Co. He is resident of Lions Club Building, Shop no.4, At Post Taluka Alibag, District Raigad. He had approached O.P.no.2- Kamal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Alibag for getting loan of Rs.1 lakh. Loan was accordingly granted to him by the society, but to secure its loan amount the Credit society at the instance of complainant, took Shop Keepers Insurance policy from M/s.New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Mahad. Amount of premium though paid earlier by the Credit Society was debited from the account of the complainant. Policy was in force from 31/8/2005 to 30/8/2006. According to complainant, earlier he was carrying on business on M.G.Road, House no.2333/34, Mahad, but in January 2005, he closed the said shop premises and shifted to Gala no.4, Lions Club Building, Mahad, District Raigad and started business from the new premises. According to complainant, on 14/6/2006 there was burglary and theft at his shop and from his shop, watches and other articles were stolen away by the burglars worth Rs.3,32,000/-.
3. He therefore approached Insurance Co. by presenting claim form. However, Insurance Co./O.P.no.1 was pleased to repudiate the claim on the ground that insurance policy was taken for one place and shop is allegedly burgled at the other address. After repudiation letter was received, complainant approached the District Consumer Forum by filing consumer complaint against Insurance Co. as well as Kamal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Alibag/O.P.no.2.
4. O.P.no.1 contested the matter by filing written statement and pleaded that they are issuing policy for the address given by the complainant. Complainant filed proposal form and stated about address of the shop which is being insured on solemn affirmation and relying on that address, they had issued policy. If the complainant mentions different address, than the address of his own shop, then he has to suffer for the discrepancy. They had rightly repudiated the claim on the ground that the policy was taken for the premises bearing House no.2333/34, M.G.Road, Mahad, whereas in the claim form presented before them, complainant mentioned his business address as Lions Club Building, Shop no.4, Mahad, District Raigad. Since there was discrepancy in the address given regarding place of business or place of shop premises, they had rightly repudiated the claim and therefore, they pleaded that they were not guilty of deficiency in service and as such, complaint should be dismissed against them.
5. O.P. no.2/ Kamal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Alibag filed written statement and admitted that they had issued to the complainant business loan and complainant himself had taken Insurance policy to secure loan from the Insurance Co./O.P.no.1. Complainant himself mentioned address in the proposal form as House no.2333/34, M.G.Road, Mahad. Complainant had not informed the Insurance Co. about change of business address. He had submitted address of old shop and shop licence to the O.P. no.1/Insurance Co. and had purchased the policy for that address and therefore on repudiation of claim by the Insurance Co. /O.P.no.1, O.P.no.2- Kamal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Alibag was not responsible and liable to pay insurance claim. It therefore pleaded that complaint should be dismissed with cost.
6. On considering affidavits and documents placed on record, Forum below held that O.P.no.2 alone was responsible for deficiency in service. They had not taken insurance cover by mentioning correct address of the complainant, while giving loan to the complainant. Complainant told O.P.no.2 Credit Society that address was Lions Club Building, Shop no.4, Mahad, District Raigad. So it was at that address O.P.no.2 should have purchased insurance cover for and on behalf of the complainant. But O.P.no.2 Credit Society mentioned wrong address in the proposal form. It mentioned old address and therefore policy came to be issued in the old address and as such, claim was rightly repudiated by the Insurance Co. and for the erroneous address mentioned in the proposal form, Forum below hold that O.P.no.2- Kamal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Alibag is guilty of deficiency in service and therefore had allowed the claim as against O.P.no.2- Kamal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Alibag and directed to pay sum of Rs.2 lakhs with interest @ 8% p.a. and to pay compensation of Rs.3000/- for mental agony and Rs.1000/- by way of cost to the complainant, as such O.P.no.2 Kamal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Alibag has filed this appeal.
7. We heard submissions of Mr.Sachin Chavan-Advocate for the appellant and Mr.Sandeep Koregave-Advocate for respondent no.1/org.complainant and Ms.Kalpana Trivedi-Advocate for respondent no.2/Insurance Co.
8. We perused the impugned award and documents placed on record. Documents on record are clearly proving that complainant had taken business loan from Kamal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Alibag/O.P.no.2 on 12/8/2005. He had opted loan of Rs.1 lakh for his business and in column no.3 he mentioned his business premises as M/s.Pratik Watch Co. Lions Club Building, Shop no.4, Mahad, District Raigad. He has nowhere mentioned that he was having business at House no.2333/34, M.G.Road, Mahad. When loan was given by the Credit Society at the address M/s.Pratik Watch Co. Lions Club Building, Shop no.4, Mahad, District Raigad, it was the duty of Credit Society to procure insurance cover for the said business address on behalf of the complainant. However, it appears from the policy itself that policy was obtained by Kamal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Alibag at the wrong address of the complainant. It mentioned address of complainant of complainant as M/s.Pratik Watch Co., House no.2333/34, M.G.Road, Mahad, and nature of business watch repairing and selling. It is an admitted fact that this policy was purchased by appellant society to secure its own loan sanctioned to complainant for his shop premises, but while purchasing policy for and on behalf of the complainant, the appellant Society, mentioned wrong address and therefore after there was burglary in the shop premises of complainant, when insurance claim was lodged, it was repudiated by the Insurance Co. for the reason that according to surveyor M/s.S.B.Nalluri & Associates the insured address mentioned in the policy is different from that in which loss has taken place. So in view of the change in address, they were closing the file as No Claim. Thus we are finding that the wrong address was mentioned by the appellant society while securing insurance policy for the shop premises of complainant. This was the reckless indifference on the part of Kamal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Alibag. They blindly purchased the policy and debited premium amount from the complainants loan account. So when claim was repudiated by Insurance Co., blame lies on the appellant Credit society because they had committed mistake in mentioning correct address of the complainants shop premises, which was required to be insured. In the circumstances, Forum below rightly passed award against the appellant and directed appellant Credit Society to pay Rs.2 lakhs with compensation and cost. We are finding that the order passed by the Forum below is just and proper. It is sustainable in law and there appears to be no substance in appeal preferred by Credit Society. Hence the following order:-
ORDER
1.
Appeal stands dismissed.
2. Parties are left to bear their own cost.
3. Misc.
application stands disposed of.
4. Pronounced and dictated in the open court.
5. Inform the parties accordingly.
(S.P.Lale) (P.N.Kashalkar) Member Presiding Judicial Member Ms.