GURUSHARAN SHARMA, J. - (1.) ADMITTEDLY , there were two Insurance Policies Bearing Nos. 33102/44/1/03484/84. dated 12.4.1984 and 33102/01/1/01006, dated 13.4.1984, respectively. One policy was in respect of the damages by fire, riot and strike to the building, sheds, plants and machineries and stocks of M/s. Jullendher Body Builders and the other was in respect of loss and damages by burglary and house breaking.
(2.) ON 1.11.1984. following assassination of Smt.Indira Gandhi, there was riot in Ranchi town and the insured sustained damages/loss to its buildings, sheds, plants and machineries and stock items therein, the insurance company, on necessary inquiry, verification and assessment made by its surveyor, paid a sum of Rs. 4,21,189/ - to the insured on 5.9.1985 towards the damages sustained by it. The insured was not satisfied with the said amount and therefore raised a dis - pute and claim in respect of the aforesaid two insurance policies, which was referred to two arbitrators, one each nominated by both the parties, who passed a joint award on 3.7.1992, wherein the insured was found entitled to total sum of Rs. 6,53,216.45 on assessment of the damages caused on 1.11.1984. The arbitrators also granted interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the said amount from 1.11.1984 to 24.3.1990. A sum of Rs. 4,21,189/ - which had already been paid to the insured on 5.9.1985 was deducted and the insured was held entitled to receive Rs.6,42,453.53 in the aforesaid manner. By the impugned order, the said award in spite of the objection filed under Section 13 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, by the appellant insurance company, was made rule of the Court. I find that the insured claimed damages on account of losses sustained by it on 1.11.1984 in respect of both the aforesaid insurance policies in question. I find that the insurance company came out with the case that actually the entire loss and damage sustained by the insured on 1.11.1984 were covered under only one policy, i.e. for the fire, riot and strike and the amount assessed by the surveyor was appropriate and sufficient and so it was received by the insured without any protest by way of full and final settlement of the claim. However, the case of the insurance company was that in fact, there was no occasion for loss and damages suffered by the insured on account of any burglary or house breaking, which was the subject matter of the second policy and it was stopped to advance any claim in respect thereof. On the basis of the aforesaid claim and counter claim of the parties as also on consideration of the materials brought on record by the parties in support of their respective cases and claims, the arbitrators by their impugned unreasoned award held the insured entitled to get total sum of Rs. 6,53,216.45 with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. I find no reason to interfere with the impugned award jointly made by the two arbitrators, representing each party. So far as the rate of interest granted by the arbitrators is concerned. I find that earlier to the reference of the dispute and the claim raised by the insured, the insurance company of its own accord, deputed a surveyor, who after an overall assessment of the damages sustained in course of the occurrence on 1.11.1984, calculated total sum of Rs. 4,21,189/ - payable to the insured and the said amount was already received by him without any protest. In such circumstances, it may be presumed that the insurance company was under bona fide impression that the claim of the insured on account of the incident of 1.11.1984 was fully satisfied. However, thereafter, the insured raised further claim which was referred to the arbitrators, who passed on unreasoned award for payment of a lump sum Rs. 6,53,216.45/ -minus a sum of Rs. 4,21,189/ - = 2,32,027.45 more over and above the aforesaid sum of Rs.4,21,189/ - which was already paid to the insured. In a situation, the above rate of interest @ 18% per annum appears to be excessive and as such I reduce the said rate of interest to thirteen per cent per annum.
(3.) WITH the aforesaid modification in the impugned judgment and award, this appeal is disposed of. No order as to costs.;