THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD. Vs. ABRAHAM MATHEW
LAWS(KERCDRC)-2009-8-9
KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on August 14,2009

The Divisional Manager, The New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Appellant
VERSUS
ABRAHAM MATHEW Respondents

JUDGEMENT

K.R.UDAYABHANU, PRESIDENT - (1.)The appellant is the opposite party/New India Assurance Company in OP No.151/2002 in the file of CDRF, Pathanamthitta. The appellant is under orders to pay a sum of Rs 1,12,000 with interest at 12% from the date of the complaint and future interest at 6% and also to pay compensation of Rs. 5,000/and costs of Rs. 2,000/
(2.)The case of the complainant is that his rubber outlet by name M/s V.B. Rubbers at Ranni was insured with the opposite party/appellant and that during the period of policy coverage there was flood on opening of the shutters of a dam and incessant rain and the shop was immersed in water. According to him the water level remained as such for two days and as the result of the same the stocked rubber sheets and rubber scraps were damaged. It was in the midnight of 07 -07 -2001that the area was flooded. The matter was informed at the opposite party office and also to the Central Bank of India from whom he had availed loan facility. Inspite of repeated requests over telephone the opposite party did not send anybody to inspect the premises. On account of the unbearable foul smell emanated from the rubber sheets etc. and on account of the protest from the public he disposed of rubber sheets and scraps at a low price. There was a stock of 7822 kgs of rubber sheets and 5420 kgs of scrap rubber. The total value of which would work out to Rs. 3,58,704/ -. The opposite party repudiated the claim. The complainant has claimed a sum of Rs 1,90,400/ - towards loss with interest and costs.
(3.)Opposite parties have filed version admitting the policy coverage. It is the contention of the opposite party that the matter was informed to the opposite party only on 12 -07 -2001. By the time the Surveyor visited the shop on 12 -07 -2001, the petitioner had disposed of the allegedly damaged stock. There are discrepancies in the alleged stock position. The alleged loss is denied. The complainant has violated the conditions of policy by disposing of the stock without getting sanction from the opposite party.


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