SRI DEBASIS BHATTACHARYA, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 01.11.2011 in Case No. 304/2006 passed by the Ld. District Forum, Unit -II, Kolkata.
(2.) BY the impugned judgment, the Ld. District Forum has allowed the complaint on contest with cost of Rs.1,000/ - (Rupees one thousand) and directed the OP to pay Rs.71,971/ - (Rupees seventy one thousand nine hundred seventyone), the sum claimed from the OP under the policy and compensation of Rs.10,000/ - (Rupees ten thousand) for deficiency in service within 30 days from the date of communication of the order.
(3.) BEING aggrieved by and dissatisfied by the same, the OP Insurance Company thereof has preferred this appeal. The case of the Complainant in the petition of complaint is that it is engaged, inter alia, in the business of providing training and education in interior designing and awarding Diplomas in Interior Design, through the use of manual and computer based system. For the purpose of this business, the Complainant entered into a Fidelity Guarantee Insurance Policy of the OP so that the Complainant would be indemnified for the loss suffered by it in case of any fraud designed by any employee of the Complainant Company, being policy no. 98/7800069 of a maximum limit of Rs.7,50,000/ - (Rupees seven lakhs fifty thousand), valid from 13.08.1998 to 12.08.1999, which was subsequently renewed from time to time. One Beki Verghese, made an application before the Complainant for the post of Assistant Manager (Sales), and by a letter dated 24.05.2004, the Complainant provisionally appointed her as Assistant Manager (Sales) w.e.f. 24.05.2004 for a period of 06 (six) months at a monthly remuneration of Rs.8,000/ -, which was duly accepted by her. In July, 2004, she informed the Complainant that as her husband has been transferred to Bangalore, she proposed for transfer to Bangalore Branch of the Complainant, which was duly accepted and she accordingly joined the Bangalore Branch of the Complainant. On 28.05.2005, she resigned from service of the Complainant. Immediately thereafter, payment related disputes and differences arose in the Bangalore Branch of the Complainant. At the time of auditing of accounts from 17.06.2005 to 19.06.2005, it was found that there was shortage in cash that was handed over by her to the Regional Manager, Mr. Rajesh Nayar on 28.05.2005. It further transpired that she had issued money receipts from old receipt book, not meant for use, and that she with a premeditated intention used the old receipt book and collected cash from the students, which was not accounted for. The mis -appropriation was to the extent of Rs.80,100/ - (Rupees eighty thousand one hundred). Accordingly, an F.I.R. was lodged before the Cuban Park P.S., Bangalore city. On the basis of the Fidelity Insurance Policy, the Complainant approached the OP and submitted the duly filled in claim form and also furnished relevant documents. One Selva and Selva I -Tech, who was appointed as Insurance Surveyor by the OP, requested the Complainant by a letter dated 18.08.2005 to forward a list of documents and papers, which were duly furnished. As the claim of the Complainant remained unsettled, the Complainant by a letter dated 13.09.2005 to the Insurance Company requested it to settle the claim at the earliest, followed by another letter dated 10.11.2005, and a reply was made by the Insurance Company by a letter dated 23.11.2005 informing that appropriate action is being proceeded with and the Complainant would be informed accordingly. As no step to settle the claim was taken, the Complainant through their Ld. Advocates, Sinha and Company by a notice dated 08.02.2006 to the Insurance Company asked to settle the claim at the earliest, failing which appropriate legal steps would be taken against the Insurance Company, followed by another letter dated 19.01.2006, to which a reply was made by the Insurance Company by a letter dated 17.02.2006, alleging that the Insurance Surveyor had kept the matter pending. Thereafter, the Complainant once again through their Ld. Advocates made a letter dated 26.04.2006 to the Insurance Company to settle the claim, failing which appropriate legal steps would be taken in accordance with law. As the Insurance Company has deliberately failed and neglected to examine the claim of the insured and settle the same in spite of repeated reminders, the case.;