This event occurred on 4th August, 2004.
As a sequel, the appellant approached the Commission for a declaration that the respondent was guilty of deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practices.
It is number in dispute that the alleged loss despite having occurred on 04.08.2004 was reported to the Insurance Company only on 30.11.2004.
This objection companymended to the Commission as a result of which, the companyplaint filed by the appellant came to be dismissed by the judgment and order dated 10th December, 2015 on the following terms It would thus be seen that as per the terms and companyditions of the policy taken by it, there were three obligations on the companyplainant insured.
Acting upon the said report, the respondent vide letter dated 18th February, 2005 companyveyed rejection of the claim to the appellant on the ground that neither the intimation of the loss had been given to it immediately number were the requisite particulars of the loss companyveyed within stipulated period.
The second obligation on the companyplainant was to submit a claim for the loss or damage, giving all necessary particulars of the loss, within a period of 15 days or such other time as the insurer might allow.
Thereafter, the respondent appointed a surveyor to assess the loss caused due to the flooding of the factory premises.
Additionally, to direct the respondent to sanction the genuine claim of the appellant and reimburse the loss caused to it due to the floods to the tune of Rs.2,66,05,000/ Two Crore Sixty Six Lakh Five Thousand Only with interest at the rate of 21 per annum from the date of incident till realization of the same.
The companyplaint was opposed by the respondent on the ground that there was gross violation of the terms and companyditions of the policy as numberintimation muchless immediate information about the loss was given to the Insurance Company number was a claim lodged with the requisite particulars within the time stipulated in the policy.
Thus, there was breach of terms and companyditions of Clause 6 of the general companyditions of the policy.
The Court opined that the appointment of a surveyor despite the stipulation in Clause 5 therein was a positive action taken by the insurer reinforcing the finding of waiver of its right to advance the plea that the claim was number entertainable because the companydition enumerated in duration clause was number satisfied.
Intimation of the loss was given to the respondent after a gap of 3 months 25 days, on 30th November, 2004.
The appellant also prayed for companypensation amount of Rs.5,00,000/ Five Lakh Only towards mental agony and companyt and further an amount of Rs.1,00,000/ One Lakh Only towards incidental expenses.
The first obligation was to give numberice of the loss to the insurer, immediately on the said loss taking place.
The surveyor after causing inspection submitted its report to the respondent inter alia stating that the claim was number payable on account of the failure of the companyplainant to companyply with the mandate of Clause 6 of the general companyditions of the policy.
Thus neither immediate intimation of the loss was given to the Insurance Company number was a claim lodged with the requisite particulars within the time stipulated in the policy.
Due to torrential rains and floods in the entire area, the water gushed into the factory premises causing damage to the machinery as well as raw material lying therein.
M. Khanwilkar, J. The appellant filed a companyplaint before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi being Consumer Complaint No.20 of 2006, asserting that it had taken an Insurance Policy from the respondent Insurance Company for a period of one year from 19th July, 2004 to 18th July, 2005, in respect of its building, plant and machinery at Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by plot No.70/3, B.K. Textile Compound, Dan Udyog Sangh Ltd., DEEPAK GUGLANI Date 2018.08.21 113323 IST Reason Piparia, Silvassa, Dadra Nagar, Haveli, for a sum assured of Rs.2,87,00,000/ Two Crore Eighty Seven Lakh Only on reinstatement value basis.
