Surveyor's Report Not Always Conclusive In Nature: NCDRC

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Mr. Subhash Chandra and Dr. Sadhna Shanker, held that while a surveyor's report is important, it is not always conclusive in nature.

Brief Facts of the Case

The complainant, through its proprietor, obtained an SME Package Policy for stock coverage, from SBI General Insurance/insurer with a sum assured of Rs. 45,00,000. During the policy period, a fire incident occurred, causing significant loss. The complainant informed the fire station, police, and the insurer. A surveyor was appointed by the insurer, who assessed the loss. Despite full cooperation and submission of required documents by the complainant, the insurer settled the claim at Rs. 3,65,275, which the complainant refused to accept. Alleging deficiency in service, the complainant filed a complaint before the State Commission of Punjab seeking Rs. 45,00,000 along with additional compensation for mental agony, harassment, and litigation costs. The State Commission allowed the complaint and directed the insurer to pay Rs. 3,65,275 with 9% interest per annum from the specified date until payment. Additionally, the complainant was awarded Rs. 50,000 for mental and physical harassment and Rs. 21,000 for litigation expenses. Dissatisfied, the complainant appealed before the National Commission.

Contentions of the Insurer

The insurer contested the complaint, arguing it was false, frivolous, and without merit. They claimed the complainant failed to prove any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice. Additionally, they raised an issue with the complainant's name, pointing out a discrepancy between “Gulzar Mohd.” and “Gulzar Mohd. & Sons” in the balance sheet. The insurer also accused the complainant of suppressing details about a prior minor fire incident and claimed that negligence after this incident led to the second fire. They argued that the case involved complex legal and factual questions unsuitable for summary proceedings by the Commission.

Observations by the National Commission

The National Commission observed that the main issue was whether the State Commission's reliance on the surveyor's report was correct. The complainant's counsel argued that all necessary documents were submitted, including balance sheets and statements showing a closing stock much higher than what the surveyor estimated. They also contended that the surveyor's calculation of losses was flawed, particularly in the valuation of Dattis bags. The insurer's counsel, on the other hand, argued that the surveyor's report was based on evidence and could not be disregarded without solid proof to the contrary. They emphasized that under the doctrine of indemnity, the insurer's liability is limited to the actual loss proven by the insured. However, the Commission referred to the Supreme Court's judgment in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pradeep Kumar, stating that while a surveyor's report is important, it is not conclusive. The complainant, however, failed to produce credible evidence to challenge the surveyor's findings. Thus, the Commission upheld the State Commission's order, finding no illegality in its decision, and dismissed the appeal. Both parties were directed to bear their own costs.

Case Title: M/S Gulzar Mohd. & Sons Vs. SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Case Number: F.A. No. 1819/2018

Click Here To Read/Download Order