Report By A Surveyor Is An Important Piece Of Evidence And Has To Be Given Due Weightage; NCDRC

In this case, the Appellant (Insured) is a proprietor of M/s Britolite Industries. He took Standard Fire and Special Peril Policy from the Insurance Company (Opposite Party) to cover goods lying in godown, for a sum of Rs. 1.10 Crore. During the subsistence of the Policy, fire incident took place at the insured premises. Information with respect to fire was immediately given to the Insurance Company, Mumbai Fire Brigade and to the Police. The Insurance Company, after receiving the claim intimation deputed Surveyor, Shri Amar Obhan, who submitted his report assessing the loss at Rs. 94,611.00/-. The said amount was offered to the Insured by the Insurance Company. As per the Insured, goods worth Rs.26,90,000/- were lost in the fire. The Insured refused to accept the same and filed Complaint with the State Commission prayed Rs. 26,90,000/-with interest @ 12% per annum and Rs 1,00,000/- on the ground of deficiency of service. The State Commission dismissed the Complaint.

The State Commission stated that,

"However, Ld. Advocate for The Complainant could not come forward with explanation as to why the insurer should ignore the survey report, which is carried out as per the provisions of the Insurance Act, 1938. The complainant also could not address as to what other mechanism could have been adopted to assess the loss by the Opponent. Depending solely on the income tax returns and certain purchase vouchers of the goods without relevant details for payments as submitted by the Ld. Advocate for the complainant is an unimaginable proposition to assess the loss."

Aggrieved by the decision of State Commission Maharashtra the Insured filed an appeal before the National Commission under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Before the National Commission, the appellant (Insured) submitted that, the State Commission did not consider the documents filed by the Insured and made observations contrary to the records that the Insured had not filed any supporting documents. Such, non-consideration of documents resulted in serious miscarriage of justice. The State Commission solely relied upon the Survey Report without examining the reasons which were merely speculative.

The respondent (Insurance Company) submitted that, the Surveyor observed in his report that the insured did not maintain any stock records. It was submitted that the Insured did not submit the Purchase Bill file to the Surveyor despite several requests. The Insured also failed to submit the delivery challan, freight receipts and Form No. 402 to establish the genuineness and authenticity of purchases. The Surveyor also observed in his report that the huge volume of purchases by the Insured 18 days prior to the date of loss and the inflated stock inventory on the date of loss was not found to be bona fide purchase transactions.

Analysis:

The main question for consideration before the National Commission was with regard to the genuineness of the claim of the Insured.

Commission found that, the Survey Report admits the severity of loss and damage caused by the fire in the mezzanine floor, however, it questions the quantity of stock in the godown prior to the occurrence of fire.

The bench stated that, as per the Survey Report, the inflated stock during the period of 18 days prior to the occurrence of the fire incident to the extent of Rs. 30,44,485/- was not found to be bona fide, and hence was not considered for the purpose of assessment. The Insured could not establish the authenticity and genuineness of the abnormal purchases in that short period.

Commission observed that, it is settled proposition that the report submitted by a surveyor is an important piece of evidence and has to be given due weight, though it is not sacrosanct and can be ignored, provided there is cogent evidence otherwise. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the amount assessed by the Surveyor, as has been accepted by the Opposite Party Insurance Company is to be accepted. Consequently, the allegation of the Insured that the Surveyor arbitrarily reduced the assessment amount does not stand and is rejected.

Commission relied upon the case of Khatema Fibres Ltd. vs New India Assurance Company Ltd., where SC held that, "Once it is found that there was no inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance of the duties and responsibilities of the surveyor, in a manner prescribed by the Regulations as to their code of conduct and once it is found that the report is not based on adhocism or vitiated by arbitrariness, then the jurisdiction of the Consumer Forum to go further would stop."

National Commission found that, the State Commission has given a detailed and well-reasoned order. The Insured failed to point out any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order. Commission dismissed the appeal.

Case Name: Tarun Parekh v. Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

Case No.: FIRST APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2015

Corum: Hon'ble Mr. C. Viswanath, Presiding Member

Decided on: 24^th May, 2022

Click Here To Read/Download Order