SATISH KUMAR BANSAL vs ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD

THIS appeal, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, is directed against the order 24.12.2003 in Complaint No. 71/2002 by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ambikapur (hereinafter called the District Forum for short), directing the respondents 1, 2 and 3 insurer jointly and severally to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 40,000 with interest and cost, etc.

THE impugned order has been passed in the second round of litigation. Initially the matter was decided by the District Forum by its order dated 20.7.1999. The said order was challenged in Appeal No. 1140/99 before M.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bhopal (the predecessor of this Commission). The said appeal was allowed by order dated 2.1.2002. In the said appeal the contention raised on behalf of the complainant/appellant that the Fire Policy issued by the respondents 1, 2 and 3 should be treated as Fire Policy A, was accepted. It was directed in the said appeal as below: As the District Forum has not decided the entitlement of the quantum under the policy, it would be just and proper to remit the case to the District Forum for deciding the complaint afresh on the issue, whether the appellant is entitled to Rs. 3,14,550 or the amount as assessed by the Surveyor. After remission of the complaint as above, the parties were again given opportunity of hearing by the District Forum; whether the impugned order, came to be passed.

LEARNED Counsel for the parties were heard and record perused.

AS noticed earlier, it is no longer in dispute that though fire policy -C was issued the coverage of the risk of the complainant/appellant shall be deemed to be under fire policy A, in its place. It is also not in dispute that under fire policy A, the risk of damage to the building has also to be taken into consideration; while under the Fire Policy C only risk of stock kept in the mill, was to be taken into consideration. It is further not in dispute that Surveyor appointed by the insurer had assessed the damage to the stock to the tune of Rs. 36,000. In view of the order in appeal quoted above, the question to be taken into consideration is what additional amount deserves to be awarded towards damage to the building as the policy issued in favour of the complainant appellant is to be treated as Fire Policy -A. After remission of the case to the District Forum, no material appear to have been placed on record by the complainant, regarding the extent of damage to the building. Learned Counsel for complainant/appellant in the above context drew our attention to the observation of the Surveyor in his report dated 20.8.1998 that the insured had informed him that due to rains roof sheets were uprooted and the walls collapsed. However, the complainant has not placed any material on record to show as to what was the actual damage in terms of money suffered by the complainant on account of collapse of walls and uprooting of roof sheets as above. The complainant was obliged to prove the quantum of loss suffered by him on account of damage to the building. But he has failed to do so despite directions in Appeal No. 1140/99. However, in view of the fact that walls were damaged and roof sheets were uprooted, it appears just and proper to award additional amount of Rs. 20,000 towards damage as above.

ACCORDINGLY , this appeal is allowed. Impugned order is modified. Instead of the award of amount of Rs. 40,000, the respondents 1, 2 and 3 jointly and severally liable to pay to the complainant/appellant a sum of Rs. 60,000. The amount already paid by the respondents towards the satisfaction of the impugned order, shall be liable to be adjusted from the amount awarded by this order. It is further directed that the appellant would be entitled to interest on the amount awarded by the District Forum (Rs. 40,000.00) as directed by it. Interest payable is as per the direction of the impugned order. So far as additional amount of Rs. 20,000 awarded in this appeal is concerned, the interest on the said amount shall be liable to be paid from 2.1.2002 @ 9% p.a. The above amount shall be paid by the respondents to the complainant/appellant within 30 days of this order failing which interest @ 12% p.a. shall be payable by the respondents. In the circumstances of the case, the parties shall bear their own cost of this appeal. Appeal allowed.