CENTURY PULP & PAPER Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD
LAWS(UTNCDRC)-2004-3-4
UTTARAKHAND STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on March 10,2004

CENTURY PULP AND PAPER Appellant
VERSUS
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

HARLA V. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
SAVIKAR PLYBOARDS LIMITED V. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
MANTORA OIL PRODUCTS P LTD VS. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD [REFERRED TO]
RAMASESHASYA RAW AND BOILED RICE MILL VS. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD [REFERRED TO]
LALLACHERRA TEA CO LTD VS. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)THIS complaint has been filed by Century Pulp and Paper, a Limited Company, for recovery of Rs. 6,08,136/ - (Rupees six lacs eight thousand one hundred thirty -six) along with interest as on unutilized premium of this Marine Insurance Policy. The complainant has also claimed a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/ - (Rupees one lac) and cost of litigation of Rs. 50,000/ - (Rupees fifty thousand).
(2.)THE brief facts of the case are that the complainant obtained a Marine Insurance (Special Declaration) Policy (Cargo) from the O.P. No. 3, The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Branch Office, Bareilly covering transit all risk with S.R.C.C. for the consignments of finished pulp and paper through rail or road from Factory at Lalkua or its godown to anywhere in India. Policy No. 21420607/00096 for the period 1.4.1998 to 31.3.1999. This policy was a renewal policy and the O.P. No. 3 issued a confirmation letter to the complainant that they agree to renew the above policy on the same terms and conditions and also on the same rates for a further period of one year as those of last year (letter dated 27.3.1998 of O.P. No. 3). Believing this condition, the complainant obtained the policy. The O.P. No. 3 had asked the complainant to pay a premium of Rs. 18,07,969/ - (Rupees eighteen lacs seven thousand nine hundred sixty -nine) as for the renewal of the policy for the sum insured of Rs. 375/ - crores. The complainant made the above payment on the basis of quotation issued by O.P. No. 3. As per terms and conditions of the policy, the complainant submitted all the monthly declaration to the O.P. No. 3 in time. In accordance with the declarations submitted by the complainant, the total utilized sum insured worked out to Rs. 24,665.05 lacs during the policy period. On the expiry of the policy, the complainant vide letter dated 6.4.1999 requested to adjust the premium based on the monthly declaration and to refund the excess premium towards unutilized amount of the sum insured of Rs. 12,834.95 lacs. The amount was calculated by the claimant as per the terms and conditions of the policy of the insurance. In spite of various letters mentioned in para 6 of the complaint, his amount was not refunded. The complainant referred the matter to the Chairman -cum -Managing Director, H.O. Mumbai. After a span of about one year of the expiry of the policy, the O.P. No. 2 asked the complainant for confirmation of certain data relating to Marine policy for the years 1994 -95 to 1996 -97. In response to the above letter, the complainant informed that the datas were not readily available and the complainant expressed their inability to provide datas. The respondent insisted to provide the datas. It is alleged that it is not open to the opposite party to go against the terms and conditions of the policy of the insurance. The Insurance Company vide letter dated 31.7.2000 has desired to pay only Rs. 34,415/ - (Rupees thirty -four thousand four hundred fifteen) towards the refund of unutilized premium. A cheque was issued to the complainant, which he returned. After the notice, the complaint was filed.
(3.)THE opposite party, Insurance Company admitted the insurance and the policy. It is said that the amount of premium of Rs. 18,07,969/ - (Rupees eighteen lacs seven thousand nine hundred sixty -nine) was agreed as per discussions. Rules were fixed by the Tax Advisory Committee from time -to -time as per provisions of law contained in Section 64 -UC of the Insurance Act, 1938. The parties cannot escape the said statutory provisions, which is binding on them. It is alleged that the complainant failed to provide the premium and incurred claim figures in regard to his marine insurance policy for finished pulp and paper for the years 1994 -95, 1995 -96 and 1996 -97 of Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. to the Company s Development Officer Sri Hari Mehrotra for calculating the sum of premium to be refunded when the complainant did not supply, the company gathered the information through its own sources and it was found that the complainant is entitled to a refund of Rs. 34,415/ - (Rupees thirty -four thousand four hundred fifteen) only, which were sent to him by cheque. The letter dated 27.3.1998 is not a quotation. The receipt of various letters and notices is admitted. There is no cause of action for complaint. It is alleged that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Insurance Company because according to the Rules and Regulations, the complainant was entitled for the refund on the basis of utilization of three years. The complainant did not provide the data and, therefore, datas were gathered by the Insurance Company itself and what was considered due was refunded to the complainant, which he did not receive. Mr. J.A. Iraqi, duly Constituted Attorney has signed the written statement.
At the very outset we will like to say that it is admitted fact that the insurance was for Rs. 375 crores. The premium paid was Rs. 18,07,969/ - (Rupees eighteen lacs seven thousand nine hundred sixty -nine). It is further admitted that according to the terms and conditions of the policy, unutilized premium was to be refunded to the complainant but according to the opposite party, there is Tariff Advisory Committee, there are tariff and rules provided which have got statutory force and are binding on all concerned. It is said that in the Marine Special Declaration Policy, if the claim ratio for the three years excluding immediately preceding year or for any shorter period for which experience is available is more than 70%, the premium rate has to be appropriately loaded in such a way that after the loading, the loss ratio does not exceed 70% at the loaded rate. According to the opposite party, the ratio had exceeded more than 100%. In accordance with the terms and conditions and rules laid down by the Tariff Advisory Committee, the premium was loaded in such a way that the ratio arrived at is 70%. And in doing so the balance unconsumed premium was calculated as Rs. 34,415/ - (Rupees thirty -four thousand four hundred fifteen), which was sent to the complainant.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.