VISHNU CHEMICALS (P) LTD. Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.
LAWS(APCDRC)-2003-9-7
ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on September 10,2003

VISHNU CHEMICALS (P) LTD. Appellant
VERSUS
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) C .D. No. 111/98 : Mr. Justice P. Ramakrishnam Raju, President ''The complainant is a registered company engaged in manufacturing chemicals since 1989. It insured the material i.e., raw -material, semi -finished and finished stock in the factory and godown covering the risk of fire, perils, riots, etc., for Rs. 50,00,000/ - from 20.10.1996 to 19.10.1997 by paying a premium of Rs. 21,695/ - and obtained a policy bearing No. 11612200 1410 dated 25.10.1996 from the opposite party.
(2.) WHILE so on the mid -night on 26.11.1996 at about 11.00 p.m. Motor Liquor Storage tank collapsed and due to collapse of the tank and leakage of motor liquor it flowed like flood in the raw -material after processing in the manufacturing unit. The complainant informed the Insurance Company, the very same night by phonogram followed by a letter dated 27.11.1996. He also gave a police complaint on 27.11.1996 to the S.H.O., I.D.A., Bollaram who conducted Panchanama. On intimation to the Superintendent, Central Excise, Kazipally, R.R. District, he also conducted Panchanama on 29.11.1996. The driver of the excavator approached the police Station on 6.12.1996 and gave a report that the accident was due to his rash and negligent driving of the driver of the excavator loader and he was absconding from that date due to fear.
(3.) THE complainant submitted that claim forms claiming an amount of Rs. 15,39,000/ - against the opposite party. The opposite party appointed a Surveyor by name Mr. V. Nageswar Rao who visited the factory and collected the relevant documents. But the opposite party repudiated the claim arbitrarily. Hence the complaint claiming Rs. 15,39,000/ - together with interest and damages, etc. The opposite party filed counter affidavit through their Administrative Officer wherein while admitting the insurance policy however it is stated that on receipt of telegram from the complainant they have appointed one Mr. D. Chennaiah to conduct preliminary survey who submitted his report on 9.12.1996 stating that he examined the collapsed storage tank on 27.11.1996 and found that one of the 4 M.S. Channel patched up legs got broken under its own weight and the tank collapsed with the contents, that the complainant, therefore, could not establish that the loss occurred due to any accident and as such its claim was repudiated. There is no deficiency on their part and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.;


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