State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Sree Sree Madan Mohan Rice Mill vs New India Assurance Company Limited on 24 February, 2012
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission West Bengal BHABANI BHAVAN (GROUND FLOOR) 31, BELVEDERE ROAD, ALIPORE KOLKATA 700 027 S.C. CASE NO- M.A.-179/2011 CC/82/2010 DATE OF FILING of M.A. : 12.07.2011 DATE OF ORDER on M.A.: 24.02.2012 COMPLAINANTS : Sree Sree Madan Mohan Rice Mill, A Partnership Firm, Village-Sukur, P.O. Bantir, District- Burdwan, Being represented by one of its partner- Mr. Srimanta Roy. OPPOSITE PARTIES : 1. New India Assurance Company Limited, Burdwan, 70, B.C. Road, Kalitala, District- Burdwan, Pin- 713 101. 2. New India Assurance Company Limited, Chinsurah Divisional Office,Khadina More, Chinsurah- 712 101. 3. The Chairman Cum Managing Director, New India Assurance Company Limited, 87, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Mumbai-400 001. O.Ps., 4. State Bank of India, Khosbagan Branch, R.B. Ghosh Road, Burdwan. BEFORE HONBLE JUSTICE : Mr. Kalidas Mukherjee, President HONBLE MEMBER : Smt. Silpi Majumder. HONBLE MEMBER : Sri Shankar Coari. FOR THE COMPLAINANTS : Mr. Sujoy Kumar Basu, Advocate. FOR THE OPPOSITE PARTIES : Mr. N.R. Mukherjee, Mr. Rupak Banerjee, Advocates Silpi Majumder, Member
The present Miscellaneous Petition being no-179/2011 is filed by the OPs-Applicants herein u/s 13(3)(B) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 read with Section 4 and other relevant provision of the said Act praying for sending the photographs being Exhibit X for forensic examination and report to the aforesaid central Forensic Science Laboratory, Directorate of Fornsic Science, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, 30, Gorachand Road, Kolkata-700 014.
In the said petition it is stated by the Applicants that the Complainant has used manufactured documents/photographs to substantiate the claim. The Complainant has adopted fraudulent means to obtain benefit under the policy. The Particular photographs has been examined by the experts at the instance of the insured and found to be tampered, manufactured by super improving one photographs over the others. The investigator appointed by the Insurance Company, who approached the Central Forensic Science Laboratory for examination of their particular photographs and independent view. However, the said Government laboratory has stated that it can only act as per the direction of the police and/or Judicial Authority. Under the Circumstances the OP has prayed for an interim order in the interest of justice and proper adjudication of the complaint.
Against the abovementioned petition the Complainant has filed written objection wherein it has been stated that the Insurance Company has appointed their surveyor Mr. J.M. Dugar of Apex Surveyors Private Limited who conducted the survey, visited the site on several occasions for enquiries at length, collected documents and submitted the final report assessing the loss in respect of the damaged materials due to fire to the OP. It will be seen from the said survey report dated 15.09.2009 that loss has been assessed by the Final Surveyor to the tune of Rs.98,95,855/- after deducting salvage amount of Rs.26,00,000/-. It has been contended by the Complainant in the said petition that the final surveyor took photographs of 39 sheets @3 pieces of photographs of each sheet i.e. totaling 117 pieces which were submitted to the Insurance Company. It will be evident from the conclusion of the surveyor report that no breach of utmost good faith has come to our notice in course of enquiry and investigation pertaining to the loss. There was no operation of any specific exclusion/exception as enumerated in the policy. The Complainant has further contended that the claim is to be settled by the Insurance Company based on the survey report, but curiously enough that the Insurance Company has disputed and one photograph which is merely its doubt. Surprisingly the surveyor had never raised any doubt about the said photograph in the survey report. Now in motivated purpose the Insurance Company has filed the instant petition. The Complainant has mentioned that the final survey report was submitted to the Insurance Company on 15.09.2009, but the claim was neither settled nor repudiated and being aggrieved by such inaction on the part of the Insurance Company the Complainant has filed the instant complaint on 12.11.2010. But the Insurance Company had neither lodged any FIR with the police station nor filed any criminal case in the appropriate Court against the insured in respect of its contention. Keeping the case pending for long it filed the instant petition only to delay the proceeding. According to the Complainant the instant petition is liable to be dismissed.
We have carefully gone through the petition and objection against the petition and heard the arguments advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the parties. It is seen by us that admittedly the instant complaint was filed by the Complainants on 12.11.2010 praying for direction upon the Insurance Company to reimburse the damage as per the Surveyors report along with compensation as well as interest. Against the complaint petition the OPs filed the written version on 04.08.2011. The instant petition was filed by the Applicants-OP on 12.07.2011. In the said petition though the OPs-Applicants have alleged that the Complainant has adopted fraudulent means to obtain benefit under the policy and manufactured and tampered the document for illegal gain, but in the written version no case has been represented by the OP to that effect. In the petition the OP has prayed for send the exhibit-X to the Forensic Department for examination. In respect of such prayer we are of the view that admittedly upon receipt of the claim from the Complainant has appointed one surveyor for assessing the loss and damage due to fire, who admittedly after inspection of the site and perusing the relevant documents has submitted the report to the present Applicants. But inspite of getting the said report as the Insurance Company did not bother to settle or repudiate the claim; the Complainant filed the instant complaint. We have noticed that nowhere the Applicants has disputed the survey report and the surveyor also did not raise any objection in respect of the photograph exhibited as X in his report as well as nowhere in the said report the surveyor has opined that the document has been tampered and manufactured by the Complainant. Therefore we find no substance in the petition filed by the OP-Applicants and in our opinion the question for sending the said exhibited document to the Forensic Department for examination does not arise.
In view of the foregoing discussion hence, it is ordered, that the petition being no-179/2011 be hereby dismissed on contest without any cost. To 15.03.2012 For filing evidence on affidavit by the Complainants.
Shankar Coari Silpi Majumder Justice Kalidas Mukherjee (Member) (Member) (President)