State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
National Insurance Co.Ltd. vs Ajit Fabrics on 13 May, 2024
Daily Order STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA Date of Institution: 06.04.2017 Date of final hearing: 26.04.2024 Date of pronouncement: 13.05.2024 First Appeal No.408 of 2017 The New India Assurance Company Limited., SCO No.36-37, Sector 17-A, Chandigarh, through its duly Authorized Officer. .....Appellant 2. Ajit Kumar S/o Sh.Tek Chand, proprietor M/s Ajit Fabrics, situated at Katcha Kala Aamb road, Babail road, Panipat, Tehsil and Distt. Panipat. 3. Union Bank of India, SSI Branch, GT Road, Panipat through its Chief Manager.....Respondents CORAM: Mr.Naresh Katyal, Judicial Member
Mrs. Manjula Sharma, Member Argued by:- Sh.Vinod Gupta, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr.Sandeep Singh Ghangas, Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Mr. Bhavesh Aggarwal, along with Mr.Akaant Kumar Mittal, Advocate for respondent No.3.
ORDER NARESH KATYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
Delay of 20 days in filing of this appeal stand condoned for the reasons stated in the application.
2. Challenge in this Appeal No.408 of 2017 of appellant/OP No.2 has been invited to legality of order dated 06.02.2017 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Panipat(In short "District Consumer Commission") in Complaint No.88 of 2014, vide which complainant's complaint has been allowed.
3. Factual matrix:M/s Ajit Fabrics is a firm and Ajit Kumar is its proprietor. It has an account with Union Bank of India bearing No.502505010131105 and it had obtained CC limit of Rs.4,00,000/-. It had taken insurance policy for its stocks for last 20 years regularly and was taking insurance for machinery installed in premises for last three and half years including insurance of stock and building. Bank used to deduct insurance premium from complainants' account. Unfortunately, fire broke in premises of complainant in intervening night of 22.06.2014 around 5.00 a.m. and all machinery, stock etc. were burnt including damage to building of complainants. Fire brigade was reported on same day and police was also informed vide DDR No.19 and 20 dated 23.06.2014 with Police Post, Baljeet Nagar, Panipat. Insurer was also intimated. All fourshuttle less looms installed in shed were gutted badly in said fire. Electric fittings of whole machinery shed were burnt and damaged. Raw material lying near machine, stock in process on machine, finished goods consisting of Carpet (Polyester yarn and Sodi yarn) were burnt and badly damaged. As per plea, complainant had taken insurance qua stock of Rs.15,00,000/-. It was incumbent upon bank to take insurance policyfrom insurance company in respect of stock, building and machinery. Bank committed a big mistake and went for insurance of stock only and that too on wrong address (Shop No.7,SD Road, Panipat). It is pleaded that OP assured complainant that there would be no problem, in case any claim is made. In said fire, total value of stock burnt was more than Rs.15,00,000/-. Bank has given wrong address while obtaining insurance policy. Complainant submitted all relevant papers to OP No.2/insurer/appellant for payment of claim amount and requested to re-imburse loss suffered by complainants, but OP No.2-Insurer refused. On these pleas, complainants filed complaint.
4. Upon notice, OP No.1-Bank in defence has pleaded, by denying that it had been taking insurance policy of stock, building for last twenty years regularly and taking insurance of machinery installed in premises of complainants for last three and half years. Bank had never done any kind of insurance policy of firm. Contents regarding deduction of premium from account of complainants had been denied. Insurance is subject matter to secure his own goods/stocks and other material etc. and Bank has no concern regarding insurance, because it is only for Banking purpose and not for insurance purpose. It is pleaded that previous insurance policy was taken from New India Assurance Company and current year i.e. disputed policy was taken on wrong address, but from New India Assurance Company Limited. There is no deficiency in service on the part of OP No.1-Bank.
5. OP No.2/insurer/appellant, in its defence has pleaded that place of insured goods was: Shop No.7, S.D. Road, Panipat. Fire had broken out in factory premises of complainants at Katcha Kala Aamb Road, BabailRoad, Panipat on 22.06.2014 and complaint is not maintainable against insurer. Complainant has concealed real and material facts. Fire in question and calling of fire brigade is not disputed. There is no deficiency in service of insurer/appellant.
6. Parties to this led their respective evidence (oral as well as, documentary). On analysing same; learned District Consumer Commission vide order dated 06.02.2017 has allowed complaint and issued direction to OP No.2(insurer-appellant) to make payment of Rs.12,79,542/- as per Surveyor Report-Ex.R-4 along with interest @ 9% per annum from date of filing of complaint till its actual realization. Rs.25,000/- has also been awarded to complainants for mental pain and agony.
7. Feeling dissatisfied; insurer has filed instant appeal and vide order dated 26.05.2017 implementation of impugned order dated 06.02.2017 has been stayed.
8. We have heard learned counsel for all the parties at length on 26.04.2024 and examined record with their able assistance.
9. Learned counsel for appellant/insurer has raised single contention that place of incident of fire was not covered under insurance policy. Irrespective of fact that fire resulted in intervening night of 22.06.2014, yet it resulted at premises of complainants situated at Katcha Kala Aamb Road, Babail Road, Panipat. In insurance policy; insured address is: Shop No.7, S.D.Market, Panipat.Hence it is contended that insurer-appellant has no liability towards insured.
10. On behalf of complainants-respondent Nos.1 and 2; it is contended that complainants-respondent Nos.1 and 2 had been taking insurance policies from insurer-appellant, previously also, with insured address at:Katcha Kala Aamb Road, Babail Road, Panipat. However, in current policy; insured's address is: Shop No.7, S.D. Market, Panipat has been wrongly mentioned due to lapse and over-sight on part of Branch Manager of Union Bank of India (OP No.1). It is urged that when investigator discussed the issue with Branch Manager of Bank, then Manager admitted Bank's lapse so resulted due to over-sight. It is contended that complainants-respondent Nos.1 and 2 should not suffer on account of mistake committed by Branch Manager of Union Bank of India (OP No.1) regarding mentioning of wrong insured's address in current year insurance policy operative from 14.05.2014 to 13.05.2015. On these submissions, learned counsel for complainants-respondent Nos.1 and 2 has urged that there is no illegality in impugned order dated 06.02.2017 and same be maintained.
11. On behalf of Union Bank of India-respondent No.3, it is urged that bank has no role to play regarding issuance of insurance policy with the insured's address at:Shop No.7, S.D.Market, Panipat as it is none of its nature of business.
12. Undisputedly, insurance policy with currency from 14.05.2014 to 13.05.2015 was obtained from New India Assurance Company. In said policy, admittedly insured address is: Shop No.7, S.D. Market, Panipat, Haryana. This insured place in insurance policy has been mentioned, as many as at three places. Incident of fire took place in intervening night of 22.06.2014 and there was unfortunate loss of stock etc. in premises, where fire took place, which is admittedly situated at:Katcha Kala Aamb Road, Babail Road, Panipat and this place,concededly was not insured place in policy in question. Learned counsel for complainants, though conceded this fact, has yet urged that insurance policies obtained for previous years was concerning insured address at:Katcha Kala Aamb Road, Babail Road, Panipat. In this regard, it is urged by counsel for complainants that policy of current year was obtained through Union Bank of India and said Bank had mentioned wrong address of insured place due to over sight and this lapse had been admitted by Branch Manager of Bank to insurer's investigator. This Commission is of opinion that above contention on behalf of complainants has no legal and factual base to stand and moreover, it is contrary to record. Document will not tell lie. Oral assertions, whatever may be, will not be taken as gospel truth, when these are pitted against document. It is settled law that insurance policies have to be strictly construed with respect to particulars contained therein, including its terms and conditions. There cannot be alternation or substitution of any particulars specified in insurance policy, including address of insured place. Nothing stopped complainants to promptly approach insurer-appellant to change the address of insured place, when they had noticed wrong address of insured place in the policy, for purpose of getting it corrected. Curiously enough, there were no overacts/steps taken by complainants in that arena. This being so, it is held that insurance policy for period from 14.05.2014 to 13.05.2015 would be enforceable, qua insured addressi.e.Shop No.7, S.D.Market, Panipat. It cannot be legally enforced, for any claim, qua any other address, much less the address so claimed by complainants i.e.Katcha Kala Aamb Road, Babail Road, Panipat. On given facts; insurer/appellant is not obligated to satisfy the claim of complainants.
13. In view of above, this Commission is of firm opinion that impugned order dated 06.02.2017 passed by Learned District Consumer Commission, Panipat is legally not sustainable, as learned District Consumer Commission has travelled beyond the scope of particulars mentioned in insurance policy, which is a clear fallacy on its part. Consequently, impugned order dated 06.02.2017 is set aside. This appeal filed by New India Assurance Company-appellant is allowed. Complaint filed by complainants before learned District Consumer Commission is dismissed.
16. A copy of this judgment be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 1986/2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.
17. File be consigned to record room.
Date of pronouncement: 13thMay, 2024.
Manjula Sharma Naresh Katyal Member Judicial Member Addl. Bench-I Addl. Bench-I