Case nº First Appeal No.424 of 2008 of National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, July 03, 2014 (case M/s. Tata AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs M/s. Nissan Electronics Ltd.)

JudgeFor the Appellant: Ms. Anjalli Bansall, Advocate and For Respondent: Mr. Shirish V. Deshpande, Advocate
PresidentMr. D.K. Jain, President, Mrs. Vineeta Rai, Member and Mr. Vinay Kumar, Member
Resolution DateJuly 03, 2014
Issuing OrganizationNational Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission


D.K. Jain, J. President

  1. By this First Appeal, Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd. (for short, "the Insurance Company") question the correctness and legality of order dated 29.08.2008 made by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Union Territory of Daman, Diu, Dadara and Nagar Haveli, Silvassa (for short "the State Commission") in Consumer Complaint No. FA 01/2007. By the impugned order, the State Commission has partly allowed the complaint filed by Nissan Electronics Ltd. (for short "the Complainant"), under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act"), with a direction to the Insurance Company to pay to the Complainant a sum of `26,78,410/- as compensation in respect of the electronic items, which were submerged in the flood waters and could not be salvaged, along with interest @ 12% p.a. from 23.03.05, till payment.

  2. The material facts, giving rise to the present appeal, are as under:-

    The Complainant, a Private Limited Company, is engaged in the manufacture of electronic consumer durables, such as Cassette Recorders, CD Players, etc.. The manufacturing unit of the Complainant was situated at Silvassa. On 03.08.2004, when the unit was closed, the town where the factory was situated, was lashed by heavy rains as a result whereof, there were devastating floods in Daman Ganga River, close to the factory. The river defied its banks and its water gushed into the town submerging the roads, streets, houses including the factory of the Complainant. According to the Complainant, the factory was submerged upto 8 ft., resulting in heavy losses to the stocks in process, finished goods and packing materials. Since the Complainant had obtained an insurance cover, it lodged a claim with the Insurance Company for `3,22,22,066/-. The Insurance Company appointed one M/s. C.P. Mehta & Co., as the Surveyor for assessment of loss and damage caused to the property insured. The said Surveyor submitted the final report on 23.03.2005, assessing the loss at `1,81,99,031/- which was subsequently reduced to `1,81,18,271/- vide an addendum dated 07.07.2005. The said amount was received by the Complainant in four installments between the period, 26.08.2004 to 21.07.2005. The last installment of `3,70,000/- was paid after final estimation of loss by the Surveyor vide letter dated 04.07.2005. The letter refers to the earlier discussions, which the Surveyor had with the Complainant. The relevant portion of the letter reads as under:-

    "5.0 The claim will be revised and the amount due for the Insurers consideration will now be as under:-

    Claim as assessed (Revised) `1,81,18,271.00

    Less: Withholding in respect of Nil


    Less: On account payment `1,00,00,000.00

    Less: Paid earlier after final

    Survey Report ` 77,47,371.00


    Amount now due for the ` 3,70,900.00

    Insurers consideration _______________

    5.1. It was clarified to you that this is not an admission of liability either by the Insurance Company or by ourselves as surveyors either on our own behalf or on behalf of the Insurance Company, but is only an agreement of acceptance...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT