CIMA No. 98/2010. Case: DM, United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Amarjeet Singh. High Court of Jammu and Kashmir (India)
| Case Number | CIMA No. 98/2010 |
| Judges | Aftab H. Saikia, C.J. and Gh. Hasnain Massodi, J. |
| Issue | Property Law |
| Judgement Date | April 05, 2011 |
| Court | High Court of Jammu and Kashmir (India) |
Judgment:
Gh. Hasnain Massodi, J., (At Jammu)
-
The short controversy involved in the instant Civil 1st Miscellaneous Appeal is whether the Respondent had an "insurable interest" in the property insured on the date, Insurance Policy was obtained from the Appellant-Insurance Company.
-
First, an overview of admitted facts.
-
The Respondent, running business under name and style of "Pahalgam General Store" in part of a double storey building with basement at Pahalgam, insured the building along with stock-in-trade, deep freezer, fridges, soda machines, coffee machine and other appliances for an amount of Rs. 17.00 lacs (17,00,000/-) with the Appellant-Insurance Company. The insurance policy was to remain in operation with effect from 13.03.2005 to 12.03.2006. The insured building along with the stock-in -trade and other appliances etc. was destroyed in fire mishap on 08.11.2005. The Respondent immediately after the fire incident, laid a claim with the Appellant - Insurance Company for compensation on account of loss to the subject matter of the insurance policy. The Appellant - Insurance Company appointed Sh. Rajan Sharda, Surveyor & Loss Assessor to assess the loss. The Surveyor assessed loss to the insured goods and the building at amount of Rs. 12,27,230/- and submitted the report to the Appellant - Insurance Company. The claim laid by the Respondent was nonetheless repudiated by the Appellant - Insurance Company vide its No. SSG/1888/2006 dated 10.11.2006, on the ground that the insured building did not belong to the Respondent but was owned by his sons namely, Sh. Jagjeet Singh and Narinderpal and thus Respondent had no "insurable interest" in the subject matter of the insurance policy.
-
The Respondent, aggrieved at the repudiation of his claim by Appellant-Insurance Company, approached J&K State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Jammu with the complaint under Section 15, J&K Consumer Protection Act, 1987 (herein after "the Act"). The Respondent pleaded that he insured double storey building with basement at Pahalgam (Kashmir), wherein the Respondent carried on his business under name and style of "Pahalgam General Store" and also insured the stock-in-trade, machines and other appliances with the Appellant - Insurance Company for a total amount of Rs. 17.00 lacs (17,00,000/-) and obtained Insurance Policy bearing No. 111800/11/04/00321 valid with effect from 13.03.2005 to 12.03.2006, on payment of requisite premium to the Appellant - Insurance Company; that on 08.11.2005 at around 12:15 hours, an accidental fire broke out in adjoining building and engulfed the subject matter of the insurance policy. It was further averred that Sh. Rajan Sharda, Surveyor & Loss Assessor, appointed by the Insurance Company to assess the loss, vide his report No. RSA/26/F/453 dated 13.11.2005 estimated the loss to the insured building stock-in-trade, appliances etc., because of the fire mishap at an amount of Rs. 12,27,230/-. The Respondent maintained that he had an "insurable interest" in the subject matter of the insurance policy and was entitled to receive loss assessed by Surveyor-cum-Loss Assessor appointed by the Appellant - Insurance Company and also Rs. 50,000/- on account of harassment and litigation expenses. The Respondent pleaded that there was "deficiency" in service by the Appellant - Insurance Company and the Respondent had a cause to file the complaint.
-
The Appellant - Insurance Company, in its objections to the complaint, reiterated that the Respondent did not have an "insurable...
To continue reading
Request your trial