Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

5. Afterwards, the surveyor, without any justification provided an 'Addendum Survey Report' on 20.05.2015, wherein, the whole claim of the Complainant was repudiated on the basis of Spontaneous Combustion. In pursuance of that Addendum report, the Opposite party, who previously admitted the claim of Rs. 54,59,774/-, subsequently repudiate the whole claim vide letter ALLOWED PAGE 3 OF 7 CC. NO.674/2016 D.O.D. :18.07.2022 M/S SHAHI EXPORTS PVT. LTD. VS. M/S UNITED INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS dated 13.02.2016. Aggrieved by this, Complainant sent legal notice dated 18.04.2016 to the Opposite Party but of no avail.

10. The only question for consideration before us is whether the Opposite Party is actually deficient in providing its services to the Complainant by relying upon the Addendum Survey Report dated 20.05.2015 and ignored the Final Survey Report in which the claim of the Complainant was admitted.

11. On perusal, we find that the Surveyor in his Final Survey Report dated 12.12.2014, has assessed/estimated the losses to the tune of Rs. 72,11,973/-. Further, it is noted that the Opposite party vide claim note dated 15.04.2015 had accepted to pursue the claim of Rs. 54,59,774/- in favour of the Complainant. 

   ALLOWED                                                                  PAGE 4 OF 7
 CC. NO.674/2016                                                               D.O.D. :18.07.2022

M/S SHAHI EXPORTS PVT. LTD. VS. M/S UNITED INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS

12. However, subsequently, an Addendum survey report dated 20.05.2015 has also been submitted by the surveyor, wherein the surveyor without any justification has repudiated the whole claim on the basis of spontaneous combustion.

13. On comparing the reports, we find that both reports are in contradiction with each other. The final survey report has covered the detailed examination of all the facts. However, the Addendum survey report was provided on a stray observation, therefore, cannot be admitted in the present case. Also, the repudiation on the basis of said report was not justified on the part of the Opposite party.