AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
MR. Justice A.P. Chowdhri, President- Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that Smt. Naginder Kaur Kohli, herein after referred to as the complainant, has been carrying on a handicraft shop in premises No. 3, WZ-69/B, Old Mahavir Nagar, New Delhi. She has been ensuring the articles of handicraft, furniture, fixtures and fittings in her shop from year to year and similarly she obtained an insurance policy for the period 18.5.89 to 17.5.90 for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-. The landlord of the shop is one Rabel Singh and some litigation was going on between the landlord and the complainant with regard to the tenancy of the said shop. The complainant locked the shop as she had to go to Bombay for about two weeks on 25.12.93. On her return, she went to the shop on 7.1.94 and found the lower portion of the shutter broken. She suspected the involvement of the landlord and, accordingly, talked to him but she was threatened with dire consequences. She lodged a report, which was filed as DD No. 8A. This was followed by a written complaint to the Commissioner of Police on 11.1.1994. Having found the shop to have been completely ransacked, she ultimately filed a claim for Rs. 2,71,000/-. The Insurance Company appointed M/s. Anuj Suri & Associates to assess the loss. The Surveyor asked for books of accounts. The same could not, however, be produced as the books of accounts were kept in the same shop and alongwith the articles, furniture etc. the books of accounts had also been removed from the premises. She submitted an affidavit to this effect before the Surveyor. The Surveyor asked the complainant to submit lay-out of the furniture, fixtures with dimensions to enable him to make a fair assessment of the loss by letter dated 7.1.95. The complainant did not comply with the same finding it unnecessary and impossible to comply with. The plea of the Opp. Party was that there was no deficiency in service that they had appointed Surveyor to assess the loss without any delay and the complainant had been asked to produce evidence to help the Surveyor to determine the quantum of stocks so that the loss could be determined. The complainant failed to comply with the basic requirement and it was in these circumstances that the claim was repudiated.
ON a consideration of the matter the District Forum came to the conclusion that the demand for lay-out plan of the fittings and fixtures asked for by the assessor could not be considered to be unreasonable and in this view of the matter, the Insurance Company was not deficient in rendering service. It was further held that the claim appeared to have been repudiated in a hurry without issuing any show-cause notice to the complainant on receipt of the report of the Surveyor. It was, therefore, directed that if the complainant furnished the required lay-out plan, the Opp. Party shall re-open the case and settle the claim according to law. With these findings, the complaint was dismissed with liberty to the complainant to furnish the documents asked for by the Surveyor leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Aggrieved by the order, the complainant has preferred this appeal. We have heard Mr. Rajiv Behl, Advocate for the appellant and Mr. S.D. Wadhwa, Advocate for Opp. Parties and have perused the records.
Going by the version of the complainant, all account books including documents had been found to have been stolen alongwith the stock either displayed or kept in the shop. In a situation like this, it was open to the complainant to have produced evidence regarding the purchase of articles from the manufacturer, supplier or other agencies from whom the goods had been purchased. We also feel that a fair chance should be given to the complainant to produce such material as she may be able to gather. In this connection, we would like to indicate some of the material which we can immediately think of. This includes : 1. Site plan showing the size of the shop, godown or godowns covered under the policy. 2. The size and number of the racks, show-cases and other fixtures for displaying the goods, items of furniture, air-conditioner, if any, together with electricity bills of the relevant period income-tax assessment orders, if any for the preceding five years period/ telephone bill, if any, bank account, if any, particulars of the previous policy obtained by the complainant for the period available. The aforesaid material shall be produced before the Surveyor within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The material shall be considered by the Surveyor and after taking into consideration other relevant factors the Surveyor shall prepare assessment of the loss and submit his report within one month of the receipt of the aforesaid material to the Insurance Company. The Insurance Company will take a final view and decide the case within 8 weeks of the receipt of the report of the Surveyor. If the complainant feels aggrieved, it will be open to her to file a fresh complaint. The fresh complaint so filed shall be regarded as continuation of the present proceedings and objection regarding limitation will not be available to the Opposite Party. With these clarifications the appeal is allowed and order of dismissal of the complaint is set aside. Further action shall be taken in terms of the above order. A copy of the order be furnished to both sides. Appeal allowed. ______________