KRISHNA COTTON FACTORY Vs. REGIONAL OFFICE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide this order, two Original Complaints No.14/1997 and 15 /1997 are being disposed of. The parties in both the complaints are the same and the matter is also similar. The questions of fact and law involved are similar. In OC No.14/1997, the complainant, M/s. Krishna Cotton Factory, Bathinda claims Rs.13,85,000/- with 24% p. a. interest from the date of loss till payment. In OC No.15/1997, the same claimant claims Rs.13,80,000/- with 24% p. a. interest from the date of loss till payment. Both the complaints have been filed against New India Assurance Company from whom the insurance policy had been taken covering risk to loss to the goods sent from Raman Mandi, Bathinda to Salem Railway Junction and therefrom to Karripatti by Road. The goods were sent through Railways sometime in January, 1995 details of which are given in the two complaints referred to above. Such goods reached Railway Station, Salem in Tamilnadu on or about March 9, 1995. A fire occurred at the Railway Station on March 26,1995 that the stocks were damaged having been burnt. The claims were made before the Insurance Company, which were repudiated on December 13, 1995 that ultimately the complaints were filed as stated above. The Insurance Company took up the stand that the repudiation was valid and in accordance with the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The parties led their evidence on affidavits and documents. We have heard Counsel for the parties.

(2.) The following questions require consideration: 1. Whether the repudiation of the claim by the Insurance Company is arbitrary, thus resulting in deficiency in rendering service in not settling the claim? 2. Whether clause "itc Clause B" is applicable to the insurance policy in dispute as the same did not find mention in the other copies of insurance policy produced?

(3.) In case "itc Clause B" is applicable, whether the case in hand is covered therein, in other words, the liability of the Insurance Company ceased after expiry of seven days of reaching the goods at the last Railway Station, Salem.3. Though the questions framed above appear to be independent, however we find that they are over-lapping and can be discussed together. Ex. C7 is the office copy of Marine Policy issued by New India Assurance Company in the name of the complainant. The terms of the policy mention "risk covered: basic, TPND and SRCC, B? At this stage, it may be observed that 'b' is mentioned merely initial of the person issuing the policy is not clear. None of the parties have cleared this aspect of the matter and is left at that. While calculating premium, it may be observed that on the basis of basic, TPND and SRCC, different amounts were calculated alongwith stamp duty for Re.1/-. For "itc Clause B" reference of which would be made subsequently, no separate premium was calculated. Thus from the discussion as above, it is quite clear that clause "itc Clause B" was not to be made applicable in the case and it was not so intended.