Skip to main content

Report of the surveyor forms the basis for settlement of the Insurance claim

In New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs M/S. Jamia Hamdard, EPABX system installed at the office ofrespondent was insured under Fire & Special Perils Insurance Policy for a sum insured of Rs.15,00,000/-. On 02.10.2004, it was reported that the said EPABX went out of order since 2.10.2004 and was claimed to be total loss. The surveyors inspected the affected machine on 28.10.2004.  A claim for Rs.9,24,000/- was submitted by respondent to the surveyors.  The Service Engineers of the insured machine had confirmed that the damage has taken place to the system cards due to very high voltage due to lightning and the surveyor agreed with the views of the Service Engineers.   In view of the exclusion being applicable, the claim was not within the scope of the policy and was repudiated by letter dated 10.2.2005. The respondent complained before the District Forum which allowed the claim  directed the petitioner to pay to the respondent Rs.15 lacs with compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for mental agony, harassment and deficiency of service and Rs.20,000/- costs. The appeal of the petitioner was rejected by the State Forum.

The petitioner appeal before the National Forum under several grounds:-

1) No claim can be allowed for more amount than the claim filed with the insurance company. The original claim was for Rs.9,24,000/-, however, the District Forum has allowed the claim for the total sum assured of Rupees 15 lacs and the State Commission has also confirmed the same.
2) Exclusion clause number 7 of the general exclusions of the policy is attracted in the present case as the cards were damaged due to direct impact of electricity high voltage caused by lightning. No other component has been damaged which could have been paid for. 
3) No reasoning has been given for not accepting the report of the surveyor. 
4) The forum below have directed compensation for mental agony and harassment but as per the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sikka Papers Limited Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. , it has been decided that no such compensation is payable to any institution.

The NCDRC held that :-

1) Lightning is covered under the policy without any qualifications attached to this  peril. In the General Exclusion Clause No. 7, though the component damaged with fire on account of lightening is also excluded, however, in the present case, there was no fire on account of lightning and therefore the component damaged from lightning is not excluded due to this clause. From the above analysis, it is clear that the damage to the cards is covered under the policy.
2) As per judgment of the Supreme Court in Sri Venkateswara Syndicate vs. Oriental Insurance Company Limited & Anr and  Sikka Papers Limited Vs. National Insurance Company Limited, the report of the surveyor forms the basis for settlement of the Insurance claim unless there are cogent reasons for not accepting the same. Moreover, when the claim submitted before the surveyor was only for rupees 9,24,000/-, there is no basis for granting a compensation of Rupees 15 lakhs under the insurance policy. 
3) AN institution is not entitled to get any compensation for harassment and mental agony as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sikka papers Limited.

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more

No Rebate For Stamp Duty Paid In Another State - Bombay HC

A three judge bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Bombay HC) in a recent judgment in the matter of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune and Superintendent of Stamp (Headquarters), Mumbai v Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai and Reliance Petroleum Limited, Gujarat1 has held that orders in case of a scheme of arrangement under Section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) involving different High Courts in multiple states, are separate instruments in themselves. Accordingly, stamp duty would be payable on all the orders (and consequently, all the states) without the benefit of remission, rebate or set-off.
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more