UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. ANIL MODI OIL INDUSTRIES LTD
PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
Anil Modi Oil Industries Ltd
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THIS order will dispose of two appeals namely First Appeal No. 1251 of 2005, The United India Insurance Company Limited v. M/s. Anil Modi Oil Industries Limited and First Appeal No. 1334 of 2005, M/s. Anil Modi Oil Industries Limited v. United India Insurance Company Limited, as both the appeals are directed against the same impugned order dated 5.8.2005 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sangrur (in short "the District Forum"). The facts are taken from First Appeal No. 1251 of 2005 and the parties would be referred by their status in this appeal.
(2.) THE version of the respondents was that they had got insured their diesel genset (in short "the genset") from the appellants for the period from 1.4.2003 to 31.3.2004 for an amount of Rs. 11,50,000. The genset got damaged on 9.12.2003. It was got repaired from the authorised dealers of Ludhiana and an amount of Rs. 2,99,701 was incurred. The information was given to the appellants. The appellants had appointed the Surveyor. However, the insurance claim was repudiated by the appellants vide their letter dated 9.7.2004. Hence, the complaint for insurance claim of Rs. 2,99,701. Compensation, interest and costs were also prayed.
(3.) THE appellants filed the written reply. It was admitted that the genset of the respondents was insured by the appellants for the period from 1.4.2003 to 31.3.2004 for an amount of Rs. 11,50,000. It was also admitted that the appellants had received the information from the respondents that their genset was damaged on 9.12.2003. However, it was denied if the respondents had incurred an expenditure of Rs. 2,99,701.
It was further pleaded that the appellants had appointed Shri M.S. Kohli, Surveyor for preliminary report. Thereafter, Shri R.P. Bhasin was appointed as Surveyor to assess the loss. These reports did not tally with each other. Thereafter, the matter was referred to M/s. Protect Engineers who were the Loss Assessors. As per clause of accident filled in the claim form by the respondents, the engine had suddenly started giving white smoke. The emission of white smoke could only be possible due to error in timing which means advance or delay in timing of the engine. This leads to improper combustion and this leads to heating up of the engine but it might take long time between emission of white smoke and melting of piston. Therefore, the respondents had intentionally not taken corrective action even after noticing the white smoke. Therefore, the loss was due to sheer negligence of the respondents which was not covered by condition No. 6 of the insurance policy. Therefore, the repudiation was legal and valid. Dismissal of the complaint was prayed.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.