AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This appeal arises out of the order dated 25th October 2017 passed by the then J&K State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Srinagar (hereinafter ‘The Commission’) whereby the contention raised by the appellant that risk of flood was not covered under the policy, has been rejected.
This appeal has been filed primarily on the ground that by returning a finding at the preliminary stage only, the appellant has been rendered defenseless during the course of the trial of the complaint.
Mr. N. A. Dandru, learned counsel vehemently argued that the policy obtained by the respondent was marine insurance and as the risk of floods was not covered under the policy, so the Commission was not justified in returning a finding with regard to the contention raised by the appellant without allowing the appellant to prove the said fact during trial.
We have heard learned counsel and perused the records.
The Commission vide order dated 25th October 2017 has rejected the contention raised by the appellant with regard to the fact that risk of flood was not covered under the marine insurance.
Without commenting upon the merits of the claim of the respective parties, we are of the view that the learned Commission should not have returned any finding upon the merits of the claim when the parties were yet to lead evidence.
In view of this, we deem it proper to dispose of the appeal with the observation that the appellant shall be at liberty to raise all the pleas taken by appellant in its written version before the Commission and the Commission shall decide the same without being influenced in any manner by the observations made by the Commission in order dated 25th October 2017.
This appeal is accordingly disposed of.