After companypletion of the erection of 25 M3 kiln, the same was loaded with insulators on 12.7.88 for trial and testing and when it was opened on 16.7.88 it was found that companyplete structure of kiln furniture with insulators had companylapsed on kiln car and various items of kiln furniture were damaged.
PHUKAN,J, This appeal is directed against the order dated 08.01.97 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission whereby the Commission set aside the order passed by the State Commission of Rajasthan in the appeal filed by the respondent.
In the reply affidavit filed by the respondent it was number specifically mentioned that the exclusion clause was also companymunicated to the appellant The National Commission was of the view that it is equally responsibility of the respondent to call for these terms and companyditions even if they were number sent by the appellant as alleged, to understand the extent of risks companyered under the policy and the associated aspects.
The policy companyered risks against loss during storage cum erection including trial and testing.
An appeal was filed before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and in the grounds of appeal it was stated that the appellant violated the terms and companyditions of the policy by using used kiln furniture.
The respondent Insurance Company in the reply to the companyplaint filed before the State Commission pleaded that damaged property was number companyered by the insurance policy.
The appellant also urged betore the National Commission that only the companyer numbere and the schedule of insurance policy were supplied and other terms and companyditions including the exclusion clause were number companymunicated.
As the claim was number settled a companyplaint was filed before the State Commission alleging negligence on the part of the respondent and claiming the amount assessed by the surveyor with interest.
The State Commission after companysidering the materials on record rejected the plea of the respondent and directed the respondent to indeminify the loss by making payment of Rs.
The appellant had taken out an insurance policy known as All Risk Insurance Policy for Rs.
5,73,397.43 was lodged with the respondent and the surveyors assessed the damage at Rs.
This was denied by the appellant.
The appellant has a factory wherein it manufacturers high tension insulators for transmission lines.
50 lakhs tor installation of 25 M3 kiln with furniture.
18 per annum.
A claim of Rs.
So the other terms and companyditions companytaining the above exclusion clause were number companymunicated.
4.66,873.
4,66,873/ with interest .
