Smt. Sangita Paul, Member
This is a case filed by M/S. Rasul Mallick, son of Sahadat Ali Mallick, Village & P.O. – Dangaria, P.S. – Nodakhali, Pin 743 318, District – 24 Parganas (South) against United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. with a prayer for a direction upon the OPs for paying Rs. 6,30,000/- only for damaged stock and to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- only for mental agony and harassment and to pay litigation cost of Rs.25,000/- only.
OP No.1 is United India Insurance Company Ltd. The address is Amtala, P.O. & P.S. – Bishnupur, Pin – 743 503, District – 24 Parganas (South).
OP No.2 is Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. The address is same as above.
OP No.3 is Branch Manager, Canara Bank (previously Syndicate Bank). The address is Amtala Branch, D.H. Road, P.O. – Kanyanagar (Beside Amtala Rural Hospital, Pin – 743 503, District – 24 Parganas (South).
The complainant, by filing this case, states that he has a business; he is the manufacturer of jeans and pants. The complainant took an OD Loan vide loan Account No.9781400000123 amounting to Rs.12,00,000/- only under P.M.E.G.P. Scheme from Syndicate Bank (presently Canara Bank), Amtala Branch, OP No.2 herein.
The OP No.3 proposed the complainant to do an Insurance Policy for his business. The complainant paid the loan amount in regular instalment and the insurance amount of Rs.3,749/- on 29.06.2019 and the period of insurance is covered from 01.07.2019 to 30.06.2020. The complainant obtained an insurance certificate from United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Amtala Branch (OP No.1), vide Policy No.0302811219P105408768, Burglary Standard Policy in the name of Ms. Mallick Garmets, Prop Golam Rasul Mallick.
In May, 2020 due to Amphan the complainant faced serious loss of business. The complainant informed, the manager of the bank. The Manager came to visit the place of business. After visiting the business-site and the damaged goods, the bank manager advised the complainant to make a claim.
Thereafter OP No.1 sent a surveyor. The complainant supplied all the required documents to the surveyor and it was observed that the damage amounted to Rs.6,50,000/-.
The Insurance Company, i.e. OP No.1 without giving proper reason rejected the said claim for the damaged stock of the complainant. The complainant informed the matter to the Branch Manager, Syndicate Bank, Amtala Branch by a letter dated 01.06.2020. The complainant did not get any fruitful result as far as insurance claim is concerned. Then the complainant applied to the Assistant Director, Department of Consumer Affairs, South 24 Parganas regarding the settlement of Insurance claim, dated 05.11.2020.
The cause of action arose on 01.06.2020, when the complainant informed the matter to the Branch Manager, Syndicate Bank.
The complainant faced huge financial loss. Hence the complainant prays for directing the OPs to pay Rs.6,50,000/- for damaged stock, to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- for mental agony and harassment, to pay litigation cost of Rs.25,000/- only.
That the complaint was filed on 05.05.2022. The complaint case was admitted on 17.05.2022. On 29.08.2022, the complainant files postal track report from which it appears that the notice upon OP No.3 has been duly served. On 05.09.2022, the Ld. Lawyer of the complainant was present. OP No.3 was absent on repeated calls. The statutory period for filing W/V was expired. Hence the case proceeded ex-parte against OP No.3. The complainant was directed to take steps in respect of the OPS 1 and 2 through paper publication. On 28.`12.2022, the complainant filed a draft copy paper publication. On 01.02.2023, the complainant filed a copy of newspaper containing the publication in respect of the OPs 1 and 2. The legal notice was published on 05.01.2023 On 20.02.2023 Ld. Lawyer of the complainant is present and files hazira. Ld. Lawyer of the complainant is present. OPs 1 and 2 are absent on call. No W/V was filed by the OPS 1 and 2. On 04.05.2023, Ld. Lawyer of the complainant is present and files evidence on affidavit. On 27.07.2023, the complainant files hazira along with BNA. Heard argument of the Ld. Lawyer for the complainant. Accordingly, we proceeded for delivery of judgement.
Points for consideration :-
- Is the complainant, a consumer?
- Are the OPs guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons :-
Point No.1:-
On perusal of the documents and records, it appears that the complainant has taken overdraft loan vide loan Account No.9758140000123 of Rs.12,00,000/- only under P.M.E.G.P. (MSME) loan from Syndicate Bank, at present Canara Bank. Amtala Branch. OP No.3, proposed the complainant to do an insurance policy for his business. The complainant paid the loan amount and premium of Insurance. As the complainant took loan and paid the loan amount and insurance premiumregularly, he is a consumer U/S 2(7) of the C.P. Act, 2019..
Point No:2 :
The complainant obtained an Insurance – Certificate from United India Insurance Co. Ltd., vide policy No:0302811219P105408768. It was a burglary standard policy in the name of Mallick Garments from 16th May, to 21st May, 2020, there arose a great cyclonic storm viz Amphan. The complainant faced serious financial loss. The complainant informed the Branch Manager of Canara Bank. He came to visit the place of business. After inspection, of the damaged goods, he advised the complainant for settling claim with the insurance company.
The bank gave a unit visit report on 02.06.2020. After observation, it was reported by the authority of Canara Bank that they had found that the stocks lying in the unit had been damaged by the cyclone called Amphan. The worth of the goods was @Rs.6,50,000/-. But on 28.10.2020 the United India Insurance Company Limited repudiated the claim. The IRDA licensed surveyor informed that the water entered through open door / window resulting damage to garments. There was no inundation of rain water. Rain water damage is not covered under the policy. Due to Lockdown, the complainant could not sell the garments. After Amphan, all the stocks were damaged. But OPs 1 and 2 failed to provide proper service to the complainant. OPs 1 and 2 are reluctant to redress the claim of the complaint. The complainant took over draft loan from the bank. OP No.3 visited the spot, assessed the damage still they are not willing to give support to the complainant. It is due to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice adopted by the OPs 1, 2 and 3 that the complainant is suffering. So the second point is decided in favour of the complainant and against the OPs.
Point No.03 :-
The complainant did not get any fruitful result from the OPs 1, 2 and 3. OP No.3 visited the spot on 02.06.2020, OPs 1and 2 visited the spot on 28.10.2020. It was hard to understand by the OPs 1, 2 and 3 whether the shop was inundated or not. The complainant was harassed by the OPs 1, 2 and 3 for several times. As a result, the complainant spends time in mental agony and pain. After fulfilling all the formalities, the complainant did not get the adequate return at the time of requirement. The complainant made the insurance on the advice of the bank. Still the complainant got no facility from the OPs. Hence he is entitled to get relief as prayed for. So the third point is decided in favour of the complainant and against the OPs.
In the result, the complaint case succeeds.
Fees paid is correct.
Hence, it is,
ORDERED
That the instant complaint case be and the same is allowed ex-parte against the OPs with cost of Rs.20,000/-.
That the OPs 1, 2 and 3 jointly and / or severally are directed to pay Rs.6,50,000/- only for the damaged stock of the shop within 30 days from the date of this order.
That the OPs 1, 2 and 3 jointly and / or severally are directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order.
That the cost of litigation of Rs.20,000/- is to be paid by the OPs 1, 2 and 3 jointly and / or severally within the stipulated period of 30 days.
The complainant is at liberty to put the order into execution if the orders are not complied with within the stipulated period of 30 days.
Ld. Member Sri Partha Kumar Basu was on leave on 27.07.2023 and he did not take part in hearing the argument of the case. As such, he did not sign the Judgement and Order passed on this day.
Let a copy of the order be supplied to the parties concerned free of cost.
That the final order will be available in the following website: www.confonet.nic.in.
Dictated and corrected by me.
Member
