A.S.BOPANNA,J. - (1.) The appellant (insurer) who was arrayed as respondent No. 1 in the complaint filed before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi ("NCDRC" for short) in O.P. No. 102/2003 is before this Court in this appeal being aggrieved by the order dated 27.03.2009. The respondent No.l (insured) was the claimant before NCDRC. The plant and machinery in the factory owned by respondent No.l was charged in favour of respondent No.2 as security, while the stock in trade was hypothecated in favour of respondent No.3 (Thane Jan Sahakari Bank) for discharge of loan obtained from them. Since the respondent No. 2 and 3 are entitled to adjust the claim towards their outstanding dues, they are arrayed as parties to the proceedings.
(2.) Through the order dated 27.03.2009 impugned herein, the NCDRC has allowed the complaint in part and directed the insurer to pay the sum of Rs.79,34,703/- with interest at 12 % per annum. Out of the said amount, a sum of Rs.49,56,897/- is ordered to be apportioned in favour of respondent No. 2 (Maharashtra State Financial Corporation) and the balance amount of Rs.29,77,806/- is ordered to be paid to the respondent No.3 (Thane Jan Sahakari Bank Limited). The total amount awarded is against the claim of Rs. 1,25,25,319/- made by the respondent No.l (Insured).
(3.) The brief facts leading to the claim before the NCDRC is that the respondent No.l was engaged in the business of manufacture of polyethylene, plastic films and other similar packaging materials. The respondent No.2 had advanced loan to the respondent No.l against security of its building, plant and machinery. The respondent No.3 had also advanced money to the respondent No.l for procurement of stock in trade, which was accordingly hypothecated to them. In order to cover the risk of fire, flood and earthquake to the factory building and also the plant and machinery, the respondent No.l secured insurance policies from the appellant. One policy was to cover the risk during the period 05.02.1999 to 04.02.2000. Another policy in respect of the risk to the stock in trade was also secured which was for the period of 17.09.1999 to 16.09.2000. The respondent No.l was accordingly carrying on its business in the factory premises while on 06.11.1999 fire broke out causing total destruction of the plant and machinery, raw material as also finished and unfinished goods. The respondent No.l intimated the appellant regarding the fire incident on 07.11.1999.;