National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Maa Danterswari Cold Storage & Ors. vs Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. & ... on 30 March, 2026
1
IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
NEW DELHI
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 171 OF 2011
Maa Danteswari Cold Storage
Represented by its partners
Sunil Kumar Agarwal and
Kailash Chand Agarwal
Having its registered office at:
Amapani Badpodaguda, Kalahandi,
Orissa
Sunil Kumar Agarwal
S/o Om Prakash Agarwal
Partner of Maa Danteswari Cold Storage
R/o Bhaliajore, P.O. Badpodaguda, Amapani,
P.S. Kaksara, District Kalahandi,
Orissa
Kailash Chand Agarwal
S/o Om Prakash Agarwal
Partner of Maa Danteswari Cold Storage
R/o Bhaliajore, P.O. Badpodaguda, Amapani,
P.S. Kaksara, District Kalahandi,
Orissa ..... Complainants
Versus
1. Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.
Represented by its Director/Authorized Signatory,
Kolkata Regional Office, Himalaya House,
8th Floor, 38B, Jawaharlal Nehru Road,
Kolkata-700 071
F1
2. UCO Bank
Through Branch Manager,
Kesinga Branch, District Kalahandi,
Orissa .......Opposite Parties
BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTCE A.P. SAHI, PRESIDENT
HON'BLE MR. BHARATKUMAR PANDYA, MEMBER
For the Complainants Mr. Piyush Goel, Advocate
Mr. Himank Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Dev Bhardwaj, Advocate
For the Insurance Company Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate
For the UCO Bank Mr. S.K. Patri, Advocate
Mr. Vishwanath Pratap Singh, Advocate
PRONOUNCED ON 30.03.2026
ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Piyush Goel, learned counsel for the complainants and Advocate Suman Bagga for the Opposite Party No.1 -- Insurance Company as well as Mr. Patri, for the UCO Bank. Mr. Goel had advanced his submissions on 24th July, 2025 that has been recorded as follows: -
"Heard Mr. Piyush Goel, learned counsel for the complainants, and Ms. Suman Bagga, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 1/Insurance Company.
The complainant no. I before us is a cold storage, and through its partners/complainants no. 2 and 3, has come up questioning the repudiation of the claim by the Insurance Company for the loss suffered by the complainants contending that the loss was due to a heavy rainfall which stood covered under the perils detailed in the policy.3
The background is that a cold storage was constructed in the year 2008, and for the period in question, there was a Standard Fire and Perils Policy coverage for the duration 30.11.2009 to 29.11.2010. The incident causing the loss took place on 19.06.2010 which is within the said covered period. According to the complainants, the Intimation was dispatched to the Insurance Company about the loss and a preliminary surveyor was appointed and al preliminary joint inspection was carried out, report whereof is dated 10.07.2010 filed as Annexure A-5 to the complaint. Learned counsel submits that the collapse of the building has been categorically noted in the said inspection report, where-after a final survey took place and M/s P.K. Chakraborti & Associates carried out the survey and tendered their report dated 08.03.2011, copy whereof has been filed as Annexure-3 to the reply of the Insurance Company.
It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the complainants that in Clause-12 under the heading of "Survey and Inspection" the surveyor has mentioned that "As informed there was some rainfall on the date of the event but no cyclonic storm during the rain ".
Learned counsel submits that the fact of rainfall therefore has been noted by the insurer in the survey report, yet the claim has been repudiated on 19.06.2012 on the ground that the peril as alleged is not covered and there was no evidence of any peril so as to indemnify the loss. The letter of repudiation dated 19.06.2012 has been filed as Annexure-7 by the Insurance Company in Its reply.
Learned counsel submits that this fact of rainfall is also corroborated by the Police report that also confirms the loss having been caused due to the rainfall. It is also stated that an employee had also suffered injuries and workers managed to escape from the cold storage. The contention therefore is that such a peril would amount to an "Inundation" as provided under Clause-(VI) of the terms and conditions of the policy and consequently the repudiation is erroneous.
Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has however pointed out that no evidence was led to that effect so as to construe the loss having been caused due to any heavy rainfall and it is pointed out that neither the 4 claim form that has been filed as Annexure A-9 to the complaint nor the subsequent communication dated 12.05.2011 by the complainants anywhere refers to the cause of loss having been caused by a heavy rainfall. It is therefore the contention of the learned counsel for the Insurance Company that in the absence of any such evidence or the alleged rainfall being covered as a peril under the policy, the repudiation letter does not suffer from any infirmity and consequently there is no deficiency in service, hence the complaint cannot be entertained for the reliefs prayed for.
Learned counsel for the complainants prays for an adjournment to assist the Bench keeping in view the aforesaid submissions advanced with any material that may be available on record.
Let the matter be listed finally for hearing and disposal at 2.00 p.m. on 20.11.2025. "
The said order gives a brief sketch of the case and also the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the complainants who urges that the loss is covered under the policy and hence the claim is indemnifiable.
It is urged that the repudiation of the claim on 19.06.2012 by the Insurance Company is based on an incorrect appreciation of.the material on record and it erroneously holds the claim to be not indemnifiable.
To substantiate the submissions that the claim was indemnifiable learned counsel has invited the attention of the Bench to the terms of the policy which is not in dispute. Clause-VI is the provision under which the coverage is being claimed by the complainant and is extracted herein under: -
"VI Storm, Cyclone, Typhoon, Tempest, Hurricane, Tornado, Flood and Inundation 7 5 Loss, destruction or damage directly caused by Storm, Cyclone, Typhoon, Tempest, Hurricane, Tornado, Flood or Inundation excluding those resulting from earthquake, volcanic eruption or other convulsions of nature. (Whether earthquake cover is given as an "add on cover" the words "excluding those resulting from earthquake volcanic eruption or other convulsions of nature" shall stand deleted)."
Learned counsel submits that there was a heavy rainfall and it was on account of inundation and the adverse weather conditions that the collapse of the cold storage occurred causing a complete damage to the plant that has also been reported by the Surveyor.
To further substantiate the aforesaid facts, learned counsel has referred to the report furnished by the complainant to the Sub Inspector of Police of the concerned police outpost on 19.06.2010 and the report on investigation that has been filed as Annexure-A4. It has been urged that the police report records that "during enquiry it came to the light that the cold storage completely collapsed due to heavy rain and wind." To support this contention learned counsel has also relied on the weather report downloaded from Google dated 18th 19th & 20th June, 2010. The same have been filed as Annexure-5 collectively to the reply of the Insurance Company. He has then invited the attention of the Bench to the Joint inspection report dated 10.07.2010 to further buttress his submission which is extracted herein under:
i. J1r 0
J
Withmtl t'r.~utiic
hcr-JyFr►ilZuHo~H+rrvl!e>≤cd daurrnerttlti fltlil_Cfni,i fiu i my`d~1 laK I).urtc"s,u'~' 1sf. ICnlulumdi, Orin saa uu 19A4,21110.
void Storneo at Badpnrnuudn via Amjmni 1)i' , en!nst Standard fire & Snechd Perils l'nlie ' Nn. 21114,192110120065, , _:
Insured : Mis Man Dantcsw•:Iri ('old Stora ur.
1.0 The insured submitted Bills lnr all the Machinery items Purcha d.
2.0 Potato Purchase Bills and stock recordsas per the bilk of purchase submitt:d ; 'hc 3.0One Track load of Potato sold between .25.05^_010 to 30.05.20!0 - d ^s.`;.'• _ Purchase cost is @ Rs.21• to Rs.41- Per Kg. + some trarsoonations cost.
$.0 Electricity Bill from Jan.2010 to May, 2010 - submined by .he insured.
:.0 Purchase bill & Delivery Challan for ammonia gas.submitted by thz insured. ,` _ :0 Inspection Report of damaged Machinery items required to tcide on extent of and rtemm ise estimates of repair or replacement is to be submitted by the insured. 0 For Building, available records of account with Vouchers! Bills of Raw matl5. Payment are to be submitted.
Reinl:c n :r. ?
Required Enlarged diamensional Drg. Of building along with Boundhry walls and the Roof of the Building.
r d as surmundinb e:opriL .
9.0 Required Layout Map of the Cold Storage Complex showing inside for assessment of +:x:
10.0 Computer weighnient records of damaged Potatoes to be submitted irotten stocks.
between 23.06.2010 and 3'.26.'_1' ±se I !.0 The representative of the Surveyor during his visit Roof of chamber No.2 is ateac?
the entire roof of Chamber no.1 collapsed, a Part of I is affected ja: ,:
adjacent/connected to chamber no.1 Some pan of walls of Chamber No. any damages to other pit of collapse. During inspection the surveyor did not observe on per the suhminei :a'si:::
storied -- cold storage Building with R.C.C roof and constructi as hall is crac' d Jae ,: Y:e the Building. Brick condenser Tank adjacent to cold storage building are in Ok'Sound cor,Jir' a `c;
of wa!lgf chj?mber No.!. However the Condenser pipes .
strroun o'un'dary wall and Transformer with their supporting structures 7 their Banker as due to "Collapse of the building". Ho +'trer, the 12.0 The insured intimated the claim to on the surrounding building stru:nures b.1th collapse of the storage building had no other effect As infom:ed there was sonic inside or outside the cold storage complex or segetations around.
rain, 1 uch tliut yred is ling reinfall on the date of event but no cyclonic storm during the reaueste to submit dependable supporti jdocumcnts to substantiate the rs.+cf csusr of damage to the cold storage Building sirucwre.
Cold Storage For 111s l'.t.CI1.1KR:180NTI & ;1ss01'1.krF$
For %Us Maa Dantesnary
≤ 1'L Kw {~,, ~. Q j
(I','
h. lR.1130Rfl,Suncyor,tLo++.lcscor)
(SUNILl(lLAG,112 ti'AL) ll l
1~P
t r, 1 r2iai 9
'+los t
' 1 1 W'r i 10-Dv,! : ?y
Learned counsel urged that para-12 of the said report recites the incident that was prepared in the presence of the complainant and the Surveyor and therefore the same should be accepted as evidence with regard to the contention of heavy rainfall urged on behalf of the complainant.
The submission is that all these documents were there before the Insurance Company and the Surveyor has also taken notice of the same in his report dated 8th March, 2011.
Learned counsel during the course of submissions has also referred to the report dated 25.06.2010 that has also been indicated in the Surveyor's report as also in the joint inspection report dated 10`h July, 2010. The same is extracted herein under: -
[:l ENCL. NO. - ~® %•~: a-;r•-; ~...b--
,l, =w
c~ller.• I rIC .r•,l e
L, r.,,
t t~: ., l • J'"~ 7, aV , l j l r'
(.1l Ine\:tr. r{r,
,lnl.~~~...~ ,•I, h.. .l e. 6! nor GC.1 ..I'! l .n.
r:•
5 Izn. " It. o mi ' 1 Ilr
k CZk.lie.hn • L9e .'c ( Cr'.. 1 • 6• IC)
a_F ka .. j t~'.•.~ .
~~. X1.1 nr c•...~1~1 ~J"t1.h
La T tf,• 6 ' IS J~h
+ham 'b
"'~P YdT~4- Slab or•' Nl~ot..Iica _ j et S'Ft'_ V
C.II{n~LCId cl4rl 0 c: S U tJ e dcw otttb
Z ccw.cR r'.n~- or ~ •y.,r,.,l ~-M a~., c.Ca~~<t r!
u,;.^c IC Coii4,{ I ow'-
~s
I
]\cGtirt2 FA v. o q> CL VJL ~~p Gv ~p~ Q
r~•C c ~ b ~, ~i Gt qS
-' 's <'i j .%C C J . d> -fIu Cb Il UpsnE' .j
ik uc~?!i C2 C1T 4lr I4b C& vIr $eØ/ '
Ilr-G
J V
Ih
bees .'hct'- .:,~e~
C
el,t:
<:c, •l.Ja-4,d .J''IO J r3
0
'1 .
r s'
;il v ~c c1ti,, 4¼e Q^ A.
4. c1)J P'P•t-v,G '-('V-.• 1 L Lct.Ce.L r~ 4
±'.-
rcLln,L(~ o-- c6
j. c
'tt ,traL.ct w.c}J.L tLt $1.(4,
F,F
(,L.~f.Q.t.L Cc~c:~<.CC 4l.•.~l cl~v.c b~ILr •..k 4- c'
to. Mae Daatestwurl Cola
21?
~ lo ~l1LU. Kll4W # %tv.n„F t' ~
Parma' j- 2
t'~yam._t
nl
t (J ~} •r
CI
7. C C- ., C.•1 c
J•l.,as-~4
S t'`c t ~~ 4 Ct k t
~~~ ht k) ,loran -vlj< rest.
C V.cc,L N\t\u`c'l4C.iri M ~4,- crl
g- J1 t.
CJt
)rls L.
n 10
. b ~:L. c po..~~=d to h
{col-c.{-,. 6i-+i CCe
Or. o (L.. C-A C L,.. c~ r n .- _ ~..•. ...~
vin tiU ~.--+••
b~
7 '(s- r.c(r,•JaC rtn. co
r .., , .4 - c~war.~ea q.
C F
\p E~S
Learned counsel urged that the word "inundation" and the other weather conditions mentioned in the risks described under the perils that are covered under the policy is available for indemnification to the complainant as the event and the incident causing the collapse are directly related to heavy rainfall and the impact of such rains, hence the policy should be construed to include the coverage of the loss caused due to the same.
Responding to the said submissions learned counsel for the Insurance Company urged that the claim has been repudiated as no evidence of either heavy rainfall or inundation was tendered in spite of repeated demands and therefore the claim was repudiated after giving a pre-repudiation notice.11
10. The pre-repudiation notice dated 7t" April, 2011 is extracted herein under: -
Ra rAN.c 0 General Insurance *'t,lncp .trna, I ln''rnec r c;,,yy, y 4omitm'd Withod Prrjudi, - a- * -u7 i &;., :u v.. ;
MrSunHAg 4s Mali Danteshwan Colo Steage U-c!uniapre, Badapoguda, 4k an, Kalahandi Ar.•766012 Orissa Reference: Claim under fire policy no 2408392111820065, daim No 2f 011a1tiflu. u 1" Ly aJ' Doer Sir Reference to your claim intimation under two policy no 2408392111820065 dil,, d 19 CJ 2010, v.; xau:d to Worm you that we have deputed a surveyor immediately who have canduciA ftt:; n-cy in presence. The surveyor has discussed regarding the loss and prepared a MOM which h•s t Vn ,'grt1 jointly by both party and a copy provided to you. He has clearly stated to submit the docunr's ttd ;'X establish the cause of loss of collapse of building in order to assess the loss and ra!~= of survzy rcpert.
,.. Now surveyor has submitted his report with his findings. As per survey report, ciamm farm. c&fm infim9Gnn letter, we have observed that you have neither mentioned the cause of collapse of bui;4mg not my tk din:c:.. report b establish the same. Everywhe have stated (hat building root couapsid wn.cn tout:.., subs7M.s~'tuif o 1 plant and machinery and stock The surveyor has remmdod you v;da a8er d:::d 73.06.2010, MOM dated 10.07.2010 and severally over phone to submit the nem-,nq docum_ms. But' a . dattiyou have failed to establish the cause of loss of collapsing of buid!ng You had opted a Standard Fire & Special Perils" to cover the loss or damaged to bm'dtns, p'^r.". '•^d ntaehnery" and seasonable vegetable stock. Kindly note that this Is a named base pen's poky wf::ch co',;: i the'loss a damages to property due to any perils from uifl t as per fire po'cy subs! !a L,nrcs : j, claim settlement due to unavaitab,nv of .,.".. R. r,.
Hence we are unable to erocaedludberJor explain with in 15 days, why your claim shot:d we request you to kindly :'c oe otx ss. Therefore, the cause of loss for collapse of cold storage roof. repudiated as you have faced to establish appreciate our stand that payment of any claim has to be in accorda^x w ;• -; We are sure that you would policy issued. While expressing our inability to pay lhh c'Ym d.. ;o ; •_ conditions and provision of thereiterate our commitment to pay ell admissible claims fa ry and rote:.; above-mentioned masons, we services al the limes.
Thanking you assuring you for out best
Yours wty.
Insurance Co. Ltd.
For Reliance eneral
Authorized Signatory Orissa
Badpodaguda, Ampani, Dist•Kalahand1.706011,
/K' UCO Bank.
12
11. This pre-repudiation notice according to the learned counsel for the Insurance Company clearly stated about the observations made by the Surveyor and had called upon the complainant to provide material in response. It is urged that a reply was given by the complainant on 12 th May, 2011 which is extracted herein under: -
v MM ~e/~ DANTE ESS aD~~1ii L ~1 p `• Ph. 066/1 ,: r4.l, (COLD STORAGE) 0f,672• 1rn•, al po . Bsdpodiguda (Ampani) Mnh 943707nn, 9 ~yl - - 99311081 R6 ~St . Kalahandi (Orissa) S stu Concern Omprakaah Agrawal, po Behenl, t7 06612 2461 13, 9938410014 wl No Dale (By Registered Post with AD) Date; 12 05.2011.
To The Authorized Officer/Signatory, Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., Himalaya House, 8th Floor, 38-B, Jawaharlal Nehru Road, kolkata - 700 071.
Ref: Your letter dated 7th April, 2011 issued to the undersign reference claim under Fire ed regarding Polic N0.2101151690 regarding the date y No.2408392111820065and claim of loss as commenced on 19-0 6-2010.
Sub: Replay in respect of your clearaace as tendered to me by referr--d letter. the above Sir, The humbly information is directed to beseech your kind attention it above referred letter dated 7th April that , iersigned on 05-05-2011 subject to the 2011 was received by the stipu resaid letter, the reply is hereby tendered withi lation, as fixed in your n 20th Day of May, 2011 and such the reply is within the time without prejudice to the contention iulation as fixed by your aforesaid letter. of It is an admitted fact that the undersigned, being the Partner of M/s.
Man Danteshwari Cold Storage at Bhaliajore, Bada pogude, Ampani, District -
Kalahandi, Orissa and also insured the afore said property including structure of the building and such building was the constructed only in the year of 13 Ph 06673-2'.)4319 gM BAPTUC Il 1AIF ! 05672-24605 RR~~ ~~ Mob 9437070,359 (COLD STORAGE) 9937403188, gadpodaguda (Ampani) alt' AW°,.
pd, • Kalahandi (Orissa) Sister Concern Agrawal, Po - Behera, Q 06672 246113 9938410014 Re. No. Dolc~_ . _.._
During the time of agreement for loss in any measure on the basis of any contingent happening circumstances and before that or prior to the your authority caused verification in respect of such premises by which the subsequent destruction as it has been caused or tendered to your authority for providing claim is cogent and genuine and you have no chance to escape from the liability due to such damages as it has been caused as "Act of God". Thereof, your authority is fully liable as an insurer and the steps by putting different questions regarding cause of such happening circumstances which is absolutely contingent and such indemnity is required to be fulfilled by an active participation at your part without having any blemish therein.
It is a fact that the property as insured by your Company has also been destructed where the agreement or contingent contract was in existence and due to such contingent contract the happening circumstances can never be ignored, by your authority when the claim has also advanced at the instance of the undersigns. It is also the fact that the inquiry has also been caused in presence of the undersigned and during the time inquiry the fact was undoubtedly established regarding such destruction including the rotation of the vegetable stock and destruction of the machinery and plant. In this regard, the joint report was not been ignored as it has been submitted to your authority on 10th July,2010an this claim is required to be disbursed on your including the statement of potato part as the same was tendered to you calculated by Refcon projects on 27-12- purchase and other imminent loss, as appurtenant thereto of Rs.51,98,000/- total 2010 including the building Rs.1,13,81,521/-.
It has been specifically asked that the Surveyor, at your instance, has submitted his report with findings that the cause of collapse of building and establish the same for such cause of collapse of the nor any technical report to person having is not a a knowledge of such building but the undersigned the building'has been collapsed but the destruction technical norms by which instance, is otherwise admitted due to existence of such of building, at your agreement of insurance by which the claim is required to be prayed because of 14 Ph 06613 ?M up WAA 06612 ?46059 (COLD STORAGE) Ce Mob 943/010:154 99.314nss 188 ~Vpo, - Badpodaguda (Ampani) list. - Kalahandi (Orissa) Sister Concern . Omprakash Agrawal, Pu, Ochora, f 06612 246113, 9938410014 No. Data fact that the agreement was made by your authority after causing verification ing all thereto regarding stance and status of such building includ . At this consequential activities of such building including the continuance since the belated stage, the fact can never be overruled by your authority such property for destruction has also been made and the undersigned insured to the building, 'standard fire and special perils' to cover the loss or damage In this regard, after plant and machinery and seasonal vegetable stock.
parties inter se verification of the agreement as commenced by and between required to be is and after perusal of the joint verification report the claim rity with an your autho disbursed since the same is otherwise admissible by rity is competent enough immediate effect thereto and I hope your good autho such contingent work as disburse the same to rescue the undersigned from aciand on 19th day of June,2010.
With thanks from, "e. Mme UaaJeSaWar1(JIMC _ U!d9Y SuU.; k I~urmcrfKG,~ Sunil Kumar Agraw*t On behalf of M/s. Maa Danteshwari Cold Storage at Bhaliajore, Badapogude, Ampani, District -
Kalahandi, Orissa.
Copy forwarded to:
The Manager, UCO Bank, Kesinga - 766012, Districht - Kalahandi, Orissa.
I Wilts, ryir 15 It is urged that the reply did not render any material and rather indicated that since the complainant is not a person having knowledge of technical norms to identify the cause, therefore the same may be verified and in view of the joint verification report the consequential loss which has been observed should be indemnified.
Learned counsel urged that this reply did not specify the query and therefore the claim was repudiated vide letter dated 19.06.2012 which is extracted herein under: -
,~+~ rn Co. Ic i.
i4tI, ,n,a U+~~., A L. •unrA
~i T01; +91 33 3020 4300
J. 1NY Ce IIim;d,i' Ilouso. 80. ib>r,r Pax +n1 J330232021
in IIJ I Nrnma tlu.al
Kolkald- 7nnn/l wwW+.ro!1nC00^nural.to.in
(laim Rrpudiatilm I.cllcr
19" Junc.'a114.
Kind .\Itcntiote \L,. Sunil ,gran al
\L- Sunil Agraa'al
\t!s \Ina D.mteshtvari Cold Stior.t c
At-tlhaliajmt, l3adapoguda,
Ampani, Kalahandi
Put.? 6012, Orissa
Reference: Claim under fire policy no 2408392111820065, claim No-21011516911, Date of loss- 19.06.2010.
Dear Sir Referring to our various earlier reminder letters and surveyor's letter to explain the cause of loss or failure of building rood collapse, we would like inform you that in this regard support of you kept silence and not substantiated or submitted the valid documents in open a claim file for indefinite period fur the want claim. This is also not possible to keep conclude that there was of documents. In absence of valid and effective documents, we lightning, STFI;
no evidence of fire and allied perils which includes the act of got like issued the policy Su si ence, landslideand rock on day of loss. Please note that we have in absence of fire to coverthis risk due to fire and allied perils as above only. Therefore, concerned policy of and allied perils, which are covered by terms and conditions of the We surely insurance we are not able to consider the claim and closing it as NO CLAIM.
being a contract itself, the expect that you will appreciate that the insurance contract other than those mentioned in the insured is not entitled to any coverage of any risk under the right to repudiate thz claim policy of insurance only. However we also reserve any other grounds available to us subsequently.16
payment of any claim has to be in We are sure that you would appreciate our stand that and provision of the policy issued. While expressing our accordance with the conditions reasons.
inability to pay this claim due to the abovvc•mentioned seMces all the times.
Thanking you and assuring you for our best For liancc enenllnsuranceCO.Ltd.
Author' ,ed Signatory Orissa, ', Dist-Kalahandi•166012, CC• UCU Bank, K'3 A10 It is therefore submitted that since the peril was not covered nor was the event proved to be covered under the risk as per the terms of the policy the claim was rightly repudiated.
Learned counsel for the Bank urged that the Bank had given a heavy loan to the complainant and therefore the loss deserved to be indemnified so as to enable the Bank to retrieve the proceeds of loan advanced to the complainant as the Bank's money is public money and therefore the claim may be viewed from that angle.
We have considered the submissions raised and we have also perused the policy. The report of the Surveyor has been examined by us. The said report dated 8t" March, 2011 is extracted herein under: -17
z• K.CHAKR.ABORTI & ASSOCIATES Office Address: IMRTBRED ENGINEERS & [\'DUSTRIAL CONSULTANTS X1+9 LaOony Estate, 11 Sall lake t4 Kolluta-700061 IRDA LICENCENO. 72441! 2007.2012. d. tc i 177 Mobile No.9830040795f98300-56090.
B.Maii ID: [email protected] Survey Report No. F/10-11/103 dated 08.03.2011.
To M/s Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., Kolkata Regional Office, Himalaya House, 8t° floor, 38B, J.L.Nebcru Road, Kolkato -- 700071.
Sub : Survey Report on :-
Alleged damages to the Cold Storage Building due to collapse of Roof of Chamber No.1 of M/s Maa Danteswary Cold Storage at Badnoraeuda via AmpaniDist. KalahandLOrissa on 19.06.2010. ' Aeainst'Standard fire & Special Perils Policy No. 2408392111820065.
Insured : M/s Man Danteswari Cold Storage.
Dear Sir, Pursuant to the above and being deputed by your good self -- Vide Encl. No. 1.0 - on the basis of Insured's claim intimation letter dated 23.06.2010 and 21.06.2010 -- Vide Encl. No. 2.0 & 2.1.- we visited and inspected the above alleged damages/loss and is submitting the following report in good faith and without any prejudice as to the cause, nature and extent of damages to the properties insured. 1.0 Particulars of the Poll 1.1' 'insurer : M/s Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., Himalaya House, 8`" floor, 38B, J.L. Nehru Road, Kolkata -- 700071.
1.2 Insured : M/s Maa Danteswari Cold Storage, Bhaliajore, Badapaguda, Ampani, Dist. Kalahandi, Orissa.
1.3 Risk Address : Same as Si. No. 1.2.
1.4 Policy No. : 2408392111820065 - Vide End. No. 4.0 1.5 Policy Period : From 30.11.2009 to 29.11.2010 Contd.-2 18 IRDA UCENCE NO. 7244712007.2012.
1.6 Nati of Policy : Fire & Special Perils Policy
1.7 Total Sum Insured
S. No. Description Sum Insured(Its.)
I. Building Rs. 1,00,00 000.00
2. Plant & Machinery Rs. 70,00,000.00
3: Stock of Seasonable Vegetable. Potato etc. Rs. 48,00,000.00
Total Sum Insured Rs. 2 19,00,000.00
1.8 Excess : As per Serial No. I of General Exclusion of the Policy.
The first 5% of each and every claim subject to a minimum of Rs. 10,000.00 in respect of each and every toss arising out of Act of God perils such as Lightning, STFI, Subsidence, Landslide and Rock Slide. The first Rs. 10,000.00 for each and every loss arising out of other perils.
2.0 Date & time of event . : In the'afternoon at 1.30P.M.on 19.06.2010.
3.0 Date of appointment. : On 22.06.2010 - Vide End. No. 1.0 ff '
4.0 Date & Place of survey : Between 23.06.2010 and 27.06.2010 at the Insured's'above risk
Address. .
5.0 Persons Contacted : Mr.Sushil Kumar Agarwal - Representative of the insured.. i
6.0 Background of the Proiect:
Badpodaguda near Ampani is situated in the district of Kalahandi. It is also the border of Nowrangpur District The production of different fruits and vegetables in the district of Kalahandi is sufficient enough to run the cold storage at Badpodaguda. Sensing all these. opportunities Sri Kailash Chand Agarwal and Sri Sunil Kumar Agarwal joint hands together to set up a cold storage plant at Badpodaguda with a capacity of 5000 TPA, it will mainly store Ber, Tamarind, Mahua Flower, Char seeds and potato. All these produces are seasonal in nature and' available during the harvesting season only and when the season is over, it is a dream to see such products. So the Agarwal brothers being the resident of the nearby area and is in the business of seasonal goods have felt the need for a cold storage and come forward for settling up a cold storage in the same and style of MAA DANTESWARI Cold Storage.
The product of Ber, Tamarind, Mohua flower, Char seeds, Potato are sufficient enough to set up a cold storage in the District of Kalahandi. Besides there was not even a single cold storage unit was operating in the district at present. Thereby most of the products are damaged / sold at a very low price because of the perishable na above products -Vide Encl. No. 5.1.
Contd.-3
r m
zoNt ENse~
's7 otz $~
19
CONTINUATION SUEET 3
P.t JLUCRABORTI&ASSOCIATES c)
. DIDA LICENCE NO.72447/ 2007-2012.
J (~
1. The Industry Cold storage -
A. Nature of the industry r'
Name & Style MAA DANTESWARI Cold Storage
Constitution Partnerships
r'
Location At/ P0: Badpodaguda
District Kalahandi (Orissa)
2. Plant Capacity
5000MT
A Installed capacity
B Utilized capacity
3500 Mt
1" Year -- at 70%
2nd Year -- at 80 % 4000 Mt
3r° year -- at 90 % 4500 Mt
l a Partner
3. Promoter
Sri Kailash Chand Agarwal
At PO Behera Vt. Kalahandi, Orissa i
2`e Partner
Sri Sunil Kumar Agarwal
At PO Behera Dt. Kalahandi, Orissa
4. Cost of Project Amount in Lakhs
A Land & Land Development(Own Land)
Civil Construction 94.28
Plant & Machinery 58.38
Auxiliary Equipment & Electrical Installation 1.00
0.20 r
D. Misc. Fixed assets
E Preliminary & Pre-operative Expenses. 5.11
F Margin Money for Working Capital 11,10
Total 170.87
Term, Loan Rs. 115.0 Lac
Working capital Loan Rs. 35.00 Lac
Mode of Repayment The loan will be repaid in 7 years with a
moratorium period of I year.
I Means of Finance Amount in lac
Term Loan 115.00
Promoters Contribution 55.86
Total 170.86
II. Promoter's Contribution
To the cost of Project 33%
The insured submitted the sanctioned letter the Banker M/S UCO•Bank dated 09.03.2007 - Vide
End. No. 7.0 to 7.2. The insured revised tt nginat'proposal for further enhancement of loan from
the Banker to Rs, 272.98 lacs as per End N Contd.-4 20 Cl &CHAKRABORTI& ASSOCIATES [RDA LICENCE NO. 72447/ 20073012. CONTINUA r 7.0 Event:
7.1. As per the preliminary intimation of The insured to the Banker dt. 21.06.
Without specifying any cause of the event."With much regret, we 2010 -- Vide Encl No. 3.0 -
inform you that on 19.06.201C nearly 130p.m. our cold storage building collapsed". 7.2 The Banker MIs UCO Bank Kesinga Branch intimated the event to the Dt.21.06.2010 -- Vide Encl. No.2.0 as " with reference to the above insurer through their letter subjec you that the building of MAA DANTESWARI Cold Storage att we would like to inform Kalahandi(Orissa) has been collapsed and approximate loss occurred for Bhalajore (Ampani), eighty lacs only as reported by the proprietor." Without mentioning Rs. 1.80 crore (one Crate any cause of the event.
7.3 The event was reported by the insured during our visit to the cold storage on 25.06.2010 as per the joint report of same date as -SI.No.2.0 - of the Enel.No.10.0 -
Pam No. 2.0 - " It was Informed by the representative of M'S Dhanteswarl that on 19.06,20/0 at chamber -1 of the storage collapsed and in the process also damag about 1.30p.m. the top• roof of drying yard western wall. During the collapse. Mr.Ont Prakash ed chamber -2. and part of Agarwal was nearby witnessed the collapse" Agarwal,. father of Mr. Sunil No,cause of damage/collapse of Roof of Chamber I was report visit to risk address. ed by the Insured during'our' 8.0 Survey & Inspection:
8.1 During our Visit to the site between 24.06.2010 to 27.06.2010, we recorded the event in our joint report dt. 25.06.2010 as above. We further recorded the other observ
--vide Encl. No. 10:0 : ation and requirements as below "The log books are available with Mr. Kuna Nayalc operator undergoing treatment at Burla Medical College and hence for the machine Mr Kuna Nayak is available. The records shall be sent as soon as Mr Nayok resumthe log books were not immediately es duty afler'releasefrom Hospital.
It was also informed by Mr. Swill Agarwal that among mechanical water.piping work, electrical wiring, fittings and jttture item, A.C. Fins, Ammonia & s, insulation fining of chamber 2 etc. are burled under the slab 2 fie proof doors, pumps, valves, & hence damaged.
Stock items potato & Ber was reported to be buried under bamboo chat concretes slab along with about 2400 Photographs were taken and copy/print handed over by Mr. Agarwal.
Condenser tank (Brick work) has also been shown by At Dante shwarl as damaged & cracked A sample of broken concrete piece was handed over by At Danteshwarl Ltd.
Mr. Agarwal also pointed out to the Potato bags arranging for sorting out damaged materials from damaged and rotting bpd iterated that he is report by repairersfor verification by surveyor. Ok Stocks and also arranging for Inspection Balance sheets shall be sent separately by Mr. 4qfl'$p.p rly as possible.
Contd.-S' ti Ns orz 21 't .Cf1AKRABORTI& ASSOCIATES CONTINUATIONSHEET 5 IRDA LICENCE NO. 72447/2007-SOIL We also handed over our total requirements of documents / information as per our letter dt. 23.06.2010.
8.2 The insured submitted the Electric Bills of Eastern Electricity supply co. for the cold storage for the months of Dec./2009 to May/2010 till date loss -- vide Encl. No. 11.0 -- to confirm.that the storage wasin operation prior to the date of loss.
8.3 The insured also submitted temperature records of the Room to confirm that the Stocks inside were in Ok/sound condition without any disruption of power supply -- vide Enel. No.12.0.
8.4 We confirmed our visit & inspection as per End. No. 13.0 -- as below:
"f.0 it. Inspection was carried out with authorized representative of M/s Danteshwari Cold Storage and representative of Surveyor M/s P.IC.CHAICRABORTI & ASSOCIATES on 25.06.2010 at the site of the event.
2.0 It was informed by representative of M/s Danteshwari that on 19.06.2010 at about 1.30 P.M. the top roof slab of Chamber -- I of the storage collapsed and in the process also damaged Chamber -2 and part of Drying Yard on western wall. During the collapse, Mr. Om Prakash Agarwal, Father of Mr Sunil Agarwal Partner was nearby who has witnessed to the collapse. The insured could not specify any cause of the collapse of the Roof. In the claim intimation letter also nothing is mentioned regarding the cause of the collapse of the Roof.
3:0 It was also informed by Mr. Sunil Agarwal that among mechanical item, A.C. Fins, Ammonia & water piping work, electrical wiring, fittings'and fixtures, 2 fire proof doors, pumps, valves, insulation lining of chamber 2 etc. are buried under the slab & hence expectedly damaged. 4.0 Stock items potato & Ber, were reported to be buried under concrete slab along with about 2400 bamboo platform.
5.0 Photographs were taken and copy/print handed.over by Mr. Agarwal.
6.0 Condenser tank (Brick work) has also been shown by M/s Danteshwari "as damaged & cracked.
7.0 A sample of broken concrete piece was handed over by M/s Dauteshwari Ltd. 8.0 Mr. Agarwal also pointed out to the Potato bags damaged and rotting inside and stated that he is arranging for sorting out damaged materials from Ok/Sound Stocks and also arranging for inspection report by repairers for verification by surveyor.
9.0 Balance sheets shall be sent separately by Mr. Agarwal as early as possible."
8.5 The insured visited our office address on 10.07.2010 and our observation was recorded jointly along with.the insured -- vide Encl. No. 14.0 -- as below:
"l.0,The insuied submitted Bills for all the Machinery items Purchased. 2.0 Potato Purchase Bills and stock records as per the bills of purchase submitted by the insured.
eoen. Contd.-6
22
P.Ka, iAKRABORTI& ASSOCIATES
I RDA LICENCE NO. 72441/ 2007•x012.
<~
CONTINUATI NSHEET 6
3.0 One Twck load of Potato sold between 25.05.2010 to 30.05.2010 - Q Rs.700/, per Quintal. Purchase cost is ©a Rs.2/- to Rs.4/- Per Kg. + some transportations cost. 4.0 Electricity Bill from Jan.2ol0 to May, 2010 -- submitted by the insured.
5.0 Purchase bill & Delivery Challan for ammonia gas submitted by the insured.
6.0 Inspection Report of damaged Machinery items required to decide on extent of Repair/Replacement and itemwise estimates of repair or replacement is to be submitted by the insured.
.7.0 For Building, available records of account with Vouchers/ Bills of Raw malls. and labour mistry Payment are to be submitted.
8.0 Required Enlarged dimensional Drg. Of building along with Boundary walls and Reinforcement of the Roof of the Building.
9.0 Required Layout Map of the Cold Storage Complex showing inside and its surrounding properties.
10.0 Computer weighment records of damaged Potatoes to be submitted for assessment of damages /rotten stocks.
11.0 The representative of the Surveyor during his visit between 23.06.2010 and 27.06.2010 observed the entire roof of Chamber no.I collapsed, a Part of Roof of chamber No.2 is affected being adjacent/connected to chamber no.I some part of walls of Chamber No. I is affected due to event of collapse. During inspection the surveyor did not observe any damages to other part of the 4 storied -- cold storage Building with R.C.C roof and construction as per the submitted drawing of the Building. Brick condenser Tank adjacent to cold storage building wall is cracked due to the fall of.-wall of chamber No.1. However the Condenser pipes are in Ok/Sound condition including the surround boundary wall and Transformer with their supporting structures.
12.0 The insured intimated the claim to their Banker as due to "Collapse of the Building".
However, the collapse of the storage building had no other effect on the surrounding building structures both inside and outside the cold storage complex or vegetations around. As i cre..ti as..._ sgtMeLaip on the dal _ a of event but_ no Cyg~Rnic.storm during Ote qin As such, the insured is being requested to submit dependable supporting documents to substantiate the exact cause of damage to the cold storage Building structure." B.6 The insured submitted layout and structural Drawing of (lie cold storage as per Encl. No. 15.0.
3.7 The insured informed through their letter dated 19.09.2010 -- vide-Encl.
No.16.0 -- regarding the disposal-action of the rotten potatoes under took by them as stater! below:
"As per the telephonic discussions with you.
1. That all the weighment slip of the roasted ained due to failure current.
Contd.-1 23 P.ICCR4KRABORTI& ASSOCIATES rRDA LICENCE NO. 12447t2007-2012. C0NTINUATIOSKEET 7 2, The buried under the cement roof conc rete wail packets is 5 to IO Kg. instead of 50 Kgs. cont fully damaged and dried the weight of the each ained.
3. The rough estimate of civil and machine ry had the same may be given after compile the checgiven but exact figure of loss and rest quotation for king the chambers which Is continuing now .
It is for your information and necessary acti on."
8.8 The insured further intimated on 02.10.20 10 -- vide End. No. 17.0 -- nigarding the final estimates of loss. disposal actions and 9.0 Admissibility of the claim As per the joint observation with the insured recorded in the joint report dt.
No. 14.0 - as below: 10.07.2010 -- vide Encl.
"11.0 The representative of the Surveyor observed the entire roofof Chamber no.Iduring his visit between 23.06.2010 and 27.062010 being adjacent/connected to chamber no.!collapsed, a Part of Roof ofchamber No.2 is affected to event of collapse. During inspection the some part of walls of Chamber No. I is affected due.
surveyor did not observe any dam of the 4 storied-- cold storage Building ages to other part.
with R.C.C roofand construction drawing of the Building. Brick cond as per the submitted enser Tank adjacent to cold stor cracked due to thefall of wall of chamber No. age building wall is condition including the surround boundar ). 'However the Condenser pipes are in Ok/Sound structures, y wall and Transformer with their supp orting 12.0 The Insured Intimated the claim to thcEi the collapse of the storage building hadr Banker as due to "Collapse ofthe Building". However, both inside and outside the cold storage no other effect on the surrounding building structures some rainfall on the datgyjeyerrtbu complex or vegetations around. As/nfacmedlhere_was bein' g- re O. yi jo quested to submit dependable supp ?S4S(Gtni dyftng tlye rpi ,such the insured is damage tp the cold storage Building orting documents to.substantiate the stru cture." exact cause of The insured could not submit proo f of considered opinion the above even any special peril for the event of collapse. Therefore, in our t by the Standard fire and Special does not fall within any one of the specified perils covered perils Policy. As such, the abo admissible as per the terms and ve claim of the insured is not design or construction of the buil condition of the issued policy. May be due to some fault in ding the roof of Chamber No.1 has fallen down of Its own.
0.0 Basis of Assessment and Adju stment ofloss:
10.1 Though the above claim is not admissib avoid any future complication as per le as per the policy conditions, we are assessing the loss to the following basis.
d*sn^ooanQ . Con td:8
i Mt NS aS
m 200 r m
012
24
1G CMAKRABORTI& ASSOCIATES CON""fINUAT1ON SHEET B
IRDA LICENCE No. 7244712007-2012.
10.2 The insured submitted the claim form duly filled in -- Vide Encl. No. 18.0 -- along with the claim bill of Its. 1,13,81,521.00 -- vide Encl. No. 19.0 -- enclosing the break-up of estimates for building, Plant & Machinery and stoeks of Potato & Ber.
10.3 Regarding the claim on account of Building -- vide Encl. No. 20.0 -- we have analyzed the submitted break-up details with respect to the layout of the cold storage -- vide Encl. No. 15.0. The items considered for reconstruction -- vide Encl. No. 20.1 to 20.6 -- are more or less consistent We have applied the prevailing PWD rates and assessed accordingly. Regarding their claim for. wooden and bamboo chally, the insured submitted the procurement details from 2007 -- vide Encl. No. 20.7. It is observed that the insured claimed 1/3r° of the amount for chamber 1. It is observed by us that around 50% of the wooden and bamboo challies were intact. As such, we have assessed the loss @50% of the claimed amount. Regarding'the cost of insulation of door and windows, the insured did not submit any break-up of cost and claimed Rs.1.75 Lakhs on L.S. basis. We have considered and assessed this at Rs. 1.00 Lakh on L.S. basis. The insured claimed for dismantling charges of the building. We do not consider the same for each items but•considered at 1% of the assessed amount as per the policy condition. For building, we have considered a depreciation Q5% for the period of its use. A metallic salvage value of 1% of the assesfed loss is considered and deducted from our assessment.
10.4 Regarding the claim on account of Plant & Machinery -- Vide Encl. No. 21.0 -- it is observed that most of the claimed items were recorded in our first joint report -- vide Encl. No. 10.0. Though no inspection report of the machineries affected /damaged were submitted, It appeared during our inspection that those were fullydamagcd due to complete collapse of the roof of Chamber I which is also reflected in the enclosed photographs. As such, we considered the claimed items into our consideration. For items claimed allot, we have considered those as per our physical observation. We have verified the fates from the available submitted documents and assessed accordingly. We have considered 2 nos of baffle type liquid separator instead of 3 nos claimed a's per our observation. Anhydrous NH3 Gas claimed by the insured is not considered since this gas is an operating medium or consumable item. We have considered proportionate labour charge w.r.t. the assessed materials - vide Annexure "B". Since Sales Tax & Transportation are included in-thc- material rates, no separate assessment is made for that. For Plant & Machinery items 15% depreciation is considered for the period of there use. A metallic salvage value of 5% of the assessed loss is considered and deducted from our assessment.
I0.5 Regarding the claim on account of Stock -- vide Encl. No. 22.0-- the stocks stored in chamber no.1 was observed totally daniaged. This is also evident from the enclosed photographs. As reported, chamber No.1 contained Potato & Ber. The insured submitted the copies of the stock register for various items -- vide Encl. No. 25.0 to 25.12. We verified the stocks of Potato & Ber as per, the stock Register. No Stock of Potato & Ber was observed in Chamber No.2: Since Chamber No.3 was under construction and the insulating doors and windows between chamber No.2 &3 were awaiting insulation also. The stock register for Potato -- vide Encl. No. 25.10 to 25.12 - is verifttid with the procurement invoice copies as well as the month ending stock statements -- vide Encl. No. 23.0 to 23.4- submitted to the Banker. No procurement invoice copy of Ber was submitted but the stock statements submitted to the Banker corresponds with the stock register. As such, the quantity of Potato and Ber Is considered in our assessment. The rate of Potato is verified from the procurement invoices as reflected /referred in -- Annexure "A" -- and assessed accordingly. The insured claimed for freight-and transportation charges as per Encl. No.22.0.We have ignored the same since the same is only 0.5% of the cost of p s per Balance sheet as on 31.03.2010 -- vide Encl. No. 24.2.
FNSZ \t Contd:9
~e
o D,
25
P.KAAX1tAflORTI& ASSOCIATES CONTINUATIONSHEET 9
IRDA LICENCE NO. 7244712007.2012.
10.6 The insured claimed dismantling charges and debris removal of building materials. We have considered 1% of the assessed loss as the cost of debris removal as per the terms and conditions of the policy.
10.7 Since no current valuation of the building and the Plant & Machinery is available, we have considered the gross block value of the building and Plant and Machinery as per the balance sheets on 31.03.2011 as the present market value of the same after depreciations considering the appreciation in value is equivalent to their depreciation. The Gross Block value of Civil Construction (Building) -- vide End. No. 24.4 -- is Rs. 1,36,42,531.00 as against its covered value of Rs. 1,00,00,000.00 -- vide End. No. 4.1. As such, under insurance will be applicable to that extent of undercover while adjusting the building loss. The Gross Block value of Plant & Machinery -- Vide Encl. No. 24.4 -- is Rs. 82,17,838.00 as against its covered value of Rs.70,00,000.00 -- vide Encl. No.4.1. As such, underinsurance will be applicable to that extent of under cover while adjusting the Plant & Machinery loss. The total value of stocks is much less than the covered value at Rs. 48,00,000.00 -- vide Encl. No. 4.1. As such, no underinsurance is applicable while adjusting the loss of stock.
10.8 Our Assessment is,subject'to Policy excess, though the peril could not be established..
11.0 Assessment & Adjustment of Loss:
A) For Building -- Vide Encl. No. 20.0 Amount Amount SI. Claimed Assessed Ref. Annexure No. Description .in lakh Rs: No. /Pam No. A. Total Cost of Chamber No.1 30.59 27,05,983.00 Annexure - C B. Total Cost of Chamber•No.2 • 3.20 -2,73,693.00 •• Annexure - D. C. Total Cost of Drying shed 0.49 30;540.00 Annexure - E D. Total Cost of Machine Room 1.05 67,324.00 Annexure - F. E. Total Cost of Condenser Tank 0.53 48,400.00 Annexure - G F. Total Cost of EPS Insulation 5.97 2,91,220.00 Annexure - H G. Total Cost of Wooden & Bamboo Challey 8.40 4,20,000.00 Para No. 10.3 H. Total Cost of Insulation Door & Window .75 1.00.000.00 Parallo.10.3 51.98 39,37,160:00 Less Depreciation C-) 1.96.858.00 37,40,302.00 Less Salvage ® 1% (-) . 37.403.00 Assessed value of loss for building after depreciation &' Salvaging .37,02,899.00 a sonr14 Contd.-10 , c' t EN o.
0 7 4r m 2072 g ~ 41ossa'"..
26P.} CBAKRABORTI& ASSOCIATES CONTINUATIONSHEET 10 IRDA LICENCE NO. 724 7244712007-201L For Plant & Machinery -- Vide Encl. No. 21.0:
Total Claimed - Rs. 15,33,000.00 -
Assessed loss for Plant & Machinery -- Vide Annexure "B" - Rs. 7,31,178.00
Less depreciation ® 15% as per Para No. 10.4 (-) Rs. 1.09.677.00
Rs. 6,21,501.00
Less Salvage @5% as per Para No. 10.4 (-) Rs. 31.075.00
Assessed value of loss for Plant & Machinery after depreciation & Salvaging Rs. 5,90,426:00 For Stocks -- Ref. Encl. No. 22.0:
Stock of Potato on the date of event
-Vide Encl. No. S-13 = 6840.97 Qtls.
Assessed rate/Qtl. for Potato
- Vide Annexure "A" & Para No. 10.5 = Rs. 215.61 Therefore, loss on account of Potato = 6840.97 Qtls. x Rs. 215.61 = Rs. 14,74,982.00 Stock of Ber on thedate of event
- Vide Encl. No. S-2 = 150 Qtls:
Assessed rate/ Qtl. for Ber
-- vide Para No. 10.5 = Rs. 215.61 Therefoie, loss on account of Ber = 150 Qtls. x Rs. 215.61 = Rs. 32.341.00 Total Assessed loss for Stocks Rs.15,07,323.00 Therefore, assessed loss after depreciation and Salvaging;
Building = Rs. 37,02,899.00
Plant & Machinery = Rs. 5,90,426.00
Stock _ Rs.
, 15 0 00
Rs. 58.00,648.00
Contd.-11
»'
(: 0 i )F
27
. .CHAKRABORTI& ASSOCIATES CONTINUATIONS EET II
' A LICENCE NO. 72447/ 2007-2012.
Adjustment of loss
For Building:
Since underinsurance is applicable as per Pam 10.7, Therefore, adjusted value of loss after applying average clause Its. 37,02,899.00 x Rs.1,00,00,000.00 / Its. 1,36,42,531.00 =Rs. 27,14,232.0.0 For Plant & Machinery:
Since underinsurance is applicable as per Para,10.7, Therefore, adjusted value of loss after applying average clause = Rs. 5,90,426:00 x Rs.70,00,000.00./ Rs. 82,17,838.00 = Rs. 5,02,928.00 For Stocks :
No underinsuradce is applicable for stock,* Therefore the adjusted value of loss for stock = Rs. 15.07.323.00 LossAssessed after depreciations, Salvaging and apply the average clause. Rs. 47,24,483.00
12.0 Remarks: ', 12.1 The claim is not admissible as per the terms and condition of the issued policy.
12.2 Our professional fees based on the assessed value of loss after salvaging but before depreciation as below:
For Building = Rs. 37,02,899.00 + Rs: 1,96,858.00 = Rs. 38,99,757.00 For Plant & Machinery = Rs. 5,90,426.00 + its. 1,09,677.00 = Its. 7:00,103.00 For Stock = Rs. 15.07,323.00 Rs. 61,07,183.00
13.0 Enclosures:
I> Copy of our appointment letter dated 22.06.2010. 2> Insured's Banker's claim intimation letter 2306.2010 to the insurer. 3> Insured's claim intimation letter dt: 21.06.2010 to their Banker. 4> Policy copy enclosing schedule.
5> Insured's Background of the Proect.
6> Insured's Project at a Glance --2 Pages. 7> Sanctioned letter dt. 09.03.2007 by the Banker's M/s UCO Bank, Kesinga Br.- 3 Pages.
8> . The insuied revised the original proposal for further enhancem ent of loan from their Banker 3 Pages Contd.-12 28 p:.CHAKRABORTI& ASSOCIATES CONTINUATIONSHEET 12 IRDA LUCENCE"NO. 8441!1007-2012.
9>'Our letter dt. 23.06.2010 to the insured. 10>Joint report dt. 25.06.2010.
11>lnsured's Monthly Electric Bills &,Payment receipts --5 Pages. 12>lnsured's Temperature Log Book sheet of the Cold Storage.. 5 Pages. 13>Our e-mail dt,29.06.2010 to insurer. 14> Joint Report dt. 10.07.2010.
15> Insured's Cold Storage Layout & Structural Drawing. 16>Insured's letter dt. 19.09.2010 to us. 17> Insured's letter dt..02.10:2010 to us.• 18> Claim form duly filled in.
.19> Insured's claim bill.
20> Insured's abstract estimated cost of damaged building portion of the Cold storage.• 8 Pages. 21> Insured's estimated cost of damaged Plant & Machinery. 22> Insured's estimated cost of damaged Stock. 23> Insured's stock statement for the months of Jan,2010, Macrh, 2010, April, 2010, May, 2010 & June, 2010.
24>Insured's Balance Sheet for the Year 2009.10-6 Pages. 25> Supporting stocks register & Purchase Register --13 sheets. 26> Photographs (Coloured) --35 Copies submitted 'by the insured.
16 Copies snapped by us.
27>Surveyor's professional Bill --2 copies For M/s, P. K. CHAKRABORTI & ASSOCIATES I'1Q (P. K.CHAlatABOR ~ LICENSE No ,,44r 29
17. We have also perused the police report, the joint inspection report dated 25.06.2010 and 10.07.2010. We have also come across the claim form of the complainant which is extracted herein under: -
,l I ,: , ,► ~., , -
QeLI/\NCe
Claim Form Fire Insurance
TEE, ISSUE OF THIS FORM IS NOT TO 1W TAKEN AS AN ADMISSION OF LIARLITY As soon as toss or Damage has become known the Company must be notified do not without delay. If any detail or Information Is not readily available please delay dispatch of this form and such particular may be sent later, policy Number. l ).CS 4Q 8 3 u S) 39 2 11 3 A. INSURED Name Li Address I[ 1~ C t4 ~"' •/ 1'anDrN".,".' r CY1 ryc~~a~ti t! fin co~lc: I --~ City OCn})) Telephone Number 3. 2 39 51, 'j From 31III To ©31U ) o;0 Period of Insurance if Insured is not the sole owner, the nattut of his/their interests in the property and the details of other Interests.
Dste&TimeofLoss Iq=o6:2olb 1-3n PM
I ,
?
2, a Who noticed the toss and when
mstan ces leadin g to
3. Detail the circu
the Loss and its cause .
been intimated to:
14. Whether Loss has
1 a. Polio
b. Fire Bride ! :
iI if yes, also attach copies of then
conscientiously and
questions have been
re that the above and completeness of
I/We hereby decla would be liable for the correctness
faithfully answered and
the statement t2d co
i ,~xas
Date : I Ii c ?-t~ I b Signature
of the Insured ha•
I
/"
30
A perusal of the claim form would indicate that against column No.3 no details of any circumstances leading to the loss or its cause have been indicated. This claim form has been signed by the complainant and is dated 11.08.2010. Learned counsel attempted to argue that the complainants are layman and they simply signed the claim form when it was filled up by the Insurance Company official. We are unable to accept this submission for which there is no proof and even otherwise the signatures of the complainant are in English and it cannot be believed that he did not read column No.3 while filling up the claim form.
The intimation which was given by the complainant was dated 21.06.2010 to the Bank and the Bank in turn intimated the Insurance Company. The information given by the complainant to the police station nowhere talks of inundation but speaks about "heavy rain and wind." No other report either from the Meteorological Department or from any other administrative authority has been filed to confirm heavy downpours of rain or a wind in the nature of a storm or cyclone. The downloaded material from the Google indicates winds of 8 miles per hour and some clouds. The same also does not confirm any heavy rainfall. However, what is important is that the rainfall ought to have resulted in inundation so as to attract the coverage of the risk under the policy. No material has been placed to substantiate that the heavy rains had resulted in inundation or had flooded the premises of the factory that in turn had caused the collapse of the building. In the absence of any such material on record we cannot assume the existence of an inundated premises resulting in the collapse of the building.
On the other hand, the police report only records the information of heavy rain but there is nothing therein to indicate that the heavy rains resulted in inundation or floods either in the premises or in the vicinity or the locality. As } 31 already observed above, nothing more is coming forth and on the other hand the joint inspection report dated 25.06.2010 nowhere recites the existence of any such peril of inundation. The same is the position of the joint inspection report dated 10th July, 2010 which in paragraph-12 states that there was "some rainfall" on the date of event but no cyclone, storm during the rain. The said report further states that the complainant had been called upon to submit any supporting document to substantiate the exact cause of damage to the cold storage but no material was forthcoming and that has been indicated by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company while pointing out to the reply of the complainant dated 12.05.2011.
21. We have been in vain to find out any supporting evidence relating to the alleged heavy downpour of rain causing any inundation so as to extend the benefit of the policy to the complainant and we therefore find that in the absence of any evidence the repudiation by the Insurance Company does not suffer from any perversity. The Surveyor's report and the joint inspection reports therefore do not in any way establish the claim of the complainant for coverage of the incident arising out of inundation or due to heavy rains. The complaint therefore lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. A Shc-
..............................................
(A.P. SAHI, J.) PRESIDENT Sdl-
RajNM/Court-1/CAV ..................................................
(BHARATKUMAR PANDYA) MEMBER