SUPER TEAK WOOD INDUSTRIES vs Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

AFTER hearing both sides we are of the opinion that the State Commission was in error in holding that no investigation into the merits of the complaint was called for because of the fact that the Insurance Company had repudiated the claim of the insured as per its letter dated 1.2.1991. We have gone through the said letter and we find that there is nothing therein to indicate to our satisfaction that the Insurance Company had applied its mind with due care to all the relevant aspects and come to a conclusion in good faith as to the true nature or otherwise of the fire accident that is said to have taken place in the saw mill of the Appellant. Unless there is a reasoned reply which clearly shows that there has been such an application of mind and arrival at a conclusion in good faith regarding the truth and maintainability or otherwise of the claim put forward by the insured, there is a responsibility cast on the Redressal Forum to investigate into the dispute and come to its own conclusion in regard to the aforesaid matter. We are not satisfied, in the facts and circumstances of this case that there has been a proper application of mind by the Insurance Company to all the relevant aspects before the letter of repudiation dated 1.2.1991 was issued. Such being the position, the State Commission should have investigated into the merits of the complaint petition and arrived at its own decision as to whether the claim put forward by the complainant is tenable or not. We accordingly set aside the order passed by the State Commission and remand the case for fresh disposal to the State Commission No costs. Appeal allowed.