AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This Appeal, by the National Insurance Co. Ltd. (for short "the Insurance Company") and its functionaries, comes up for final hearing in a piquant situation for which the Insurance Company has to blame itself.
Being dissatisfied with the order dated 23.11.2010, passed by the Arunachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Naharlagun, in C.No.AP/CP-24/2007, both the Insurance Company as well as the Complainant, namely, Arunachal Distillery & Bottling Pvt. Ltd., had approached this Commission by preferring independent Appeals, being FA/27/2011 and FA/97/2011 respectively. When both the Appeals came up for final hearing on 30.5.2016, the Insurance Company was unrepresented, yet, instead of dismissing it for non-prosecution, in the interests of justice, it was permitted to file supporting affidavit for bringing on record certain document, subject to payment of costs of 2,500/-, in addition to the costs imposed earlier. It was directed that if the said order was not complied with within 4 weeks from its date, the Appeal preferred by the Insurance Company shall stand dismissed. Accordingly, final hearing in both the Appeals was deferred to 2.8.2016.
On the said date, Learned counsel appearing for the Complainant brought it to the notice of the Bench that the Insurance Company had failed to comply with order dated 30.5.2016. Since the Insurance Company remained unrepresented on this date as well, its Appeal was dismissed in default as also for non-prosecution. Nevertheless, the Appeal preferred by the Complainant, being FA/97/2011, was taken up for consideration. In the said Appeal, the sole grievance of the Complainant was that the State Commission had failed to consider its claim, amounting to 29,69,363/-, preferred for indemnification of the loss suffered by it on account of damage to its stocks, etc. in the fire, which took place on 10.11.2005. Accepting the stand of the Complainant, the Appeal was allowed and the Complaint was restored to the Board of the State Commission to a limited extent for determination of the question, whether or not the Complainant was entitled for any compensation for the loss suffered by it in respect of the raw material and other stocks, preferred by it under Policy No.604, covering stocks of all kinds of liquor, raw material and packing material and semi-finished goods. The effect of the said order was that the compensation, amounting to 62,00,497/- along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the Complaint till the final payment of the amount, on account of the loss suffered by the Complainant on account of the fire at its premises was affirmed. At this juncture, it may not be out of place to note that the Insurance Company has preferred a Review Application, being RA/234/2016, for recall of the said order.
Thereafter, an application, being MA/416/2016, was filed by the Insurance Company, inter alia , praying for restoration of its Appeal.
Upon notice, vide order dated 7.10.2016, the said application was allowed and the Appeal was restored. The Appellants were also granted one more opportunity to file the requisite documents, as directed vide order dated 12.4.2016, with advance copy to counsel for the Respondent, which has been done. It is under these circumstances that the Appeal has now come up for hearing.
At the outset, Learned counsel appearing for the Complainant submits that having regard to the fact that the Complainant has not so far received even a single penny against its claim for the loss suffered on account of the afore-stated fire, in order to cut short the life of litigation, the Complainant would not have objection if the present Appeal is allowed and the propriety and correctness of the compensation claimed by the Complainant and accepted by the State Commission is re-examined by the State Commission along with the claim of the Complainant in respect of the raw material and other stocks under Policy No.604, provided the Insurance Company is willing to deposit atleast the amount of loss as assessed by its own surveyor at 36,85,678/-. The concession made on behalf of the Complainant is acceptable to Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company.
In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the Appeal preferred by the Insurance Company, we set aside the impugned order in totality and direct the State Commission to re-adjudicate upon the Complaint giving rise to both the Appeals, viz., FA/27/2011 and FA/97/2011.
Bearing in mind the fact that the accident of fire took place as far back as in the year 2005, we request the State Commission to take a final decision in the Complaint as expeditiously as practicable and in any case not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
In so far as the question of deposit of the afore-stated amount by the Insurance Company is concerned, it is stated by Learned counsel for the Insurance Company that some amount already stands deposited in the State Commission. If that be so, we direct the Insurance Company to deposit in the State Commission the balance amount, to make good the deficiency in the total amount of 36,85,678/-, within four weeks from today. On deposit of the said amount, it will be open to the Complainant to withdraw the same, subject to its furnishing an adequate security to the satisfaction of the State Commission, for restitution.
The Appeal stands disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs.
Parties/their counsel are directed to appear before the State Commission on 20.3.2017 for further proceedings in accordance with law.
Statutory amount deposited by the Insurance Company, at the time of filing of the Appeal, shall stand transferred to the Consumer Welfare Fund.