M.THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The 2nd opposite party is the appellant.
(2.) The complainant/ 1st respondent, who is the owner of a building, situated at Seelanaickenpatty bye pass road, Nattamangalam post, Salem, had insured the said building, through Lakshmi Vilas Bank, from the period 11.8.98 for Rs.80 lakhs, with the 1st opposite party, in which, office, and shop were functioning, since the building was constructed by obtaining loan from the bank.
(3.) On 10.5.99, at about 6 p.m., due to heavy wind and rain, front elevation of the building was damaged, which was repaired by spending a sum of Rs.151,002/-. On the basis of the policy, claim was lodged, surveyor inspected, estimated the damage at Rs.80000/-. But the opposite party have failed to settle the claim, as if the building is used for manufacturing purpose, and in that case the policy to annexure ?? is applicable, whereas complainant had taken policy to the annexure ?A?, which is not known to the complainant. The 2nd opposite party, while renewing the policy, had not ascertained the same, and thereby they have committed negligent act, as well as deficiency in service. In the commercial complex building, one cannot say, for what type of business, it should be rented, and there is no vast difference between commercial purpose and manufacturing unit. The 2nd opposite party took Fire ?A? policy, from the 1st opposite party, and therefore both of them are liable to pay the amount, incurred by the complainant, which was caused due to heavy wind and rain. Despite repeated demand and legal notice, the opposite parties have failed to pay the amount, causing mental agony, and therefore they should be directed to pay not only the expenses, but also compensation, with litigation expenses. Hence the complaint.;