w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



M/s. P.P. Rubber Products P. Ltd. v/s M/s. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.


Company & Directors' Information:- THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [Active] CIN = L66000MH1919GOI000526

Company & Directors' Information:- THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [Active] CIN = L99999MH1919GOI000526

Company & Directors' Information:- THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [Active] CIN = U99999MH1919GOI000526

Company & Directors' Information:- TO THE NEW PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72900DL2006PTC235208

Company & Directors' Information:- THE RUBBER PRODUCTS LIMITED [Active] CIN = L25100MH1965PLC013379

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA RUBBER LIMITED [Active] CIN = L25199TG1981PLC003254

Company & Directors' Information:- M M RUBBER COMPANY LIMITED [Active] CIN = L25190KA1964PLC052092

Company & Directors' Information:- P P PRODUCTS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U32305WB1991PTC051091

Company & Directors' Information:- K K PRODUCTS LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31300DL1991PLC045521

Company & Directors' Information:- P P RUBBER PRODUCTS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U25191RJ1990PTC005647

Company & Directors' Information:- K B PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909MH2007PTC169627

Company & Directors' Information:- M B RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1988PTC052019

Company & Directors' Information:- K G PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909PB2007PTC031201

Company & Directors' Information:- S S P PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U22110WB1974PTC210201

Company & Directors' Information:- M L B PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1990PTC040990

Company & Directors' Information:- H B RUBBER PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74899DL1983PTC016537

Company & Directors' Information:- S M J RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U25111DL2006PTC150965

Company & Directors' Information:- M M PRODUCTS LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U28994DL1992PLC050955

Company & Directors' Information:- M P K PRODUCTS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U26919AS1994PTC004183

Company & Directors' Information:- G K PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1991PTC043260

Company & Directors' Information:- N R PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51109AS1998PTC005561

Company & Directors' Information:- C L PRODUCTS INDIA LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909DL2002PLC116975

Company & Directors' Information:- K. S. A. PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51220PB2014PTC039023

Company & Directors' Information:- G R RUBBER PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U25199CH1991PTC010981

Company & Directors' Information:- D. R. PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U52320DL2011PTC213508

Company & Directors' Information:- THE RUBBER PRODUCTS LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U99999MH1942PLC003562

Company & Directors' Information:- R S PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1989PTC036603

Company & Directors' Information:- R R PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U24249HR1999PTC034291

Company & Directors' Information:- A R P RUBBER PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U25193WB1975PTC030113

Company & Directors' Information:- I G PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999WB2012PTC183503

Company & Directors' Information:- F J RUBBER PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U00313HR2005PTC040778

Company & Directors' Information:- J S R PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31908DL2007PTC170841

Company & Directors' Information:- C F C PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28129DL1998PTC095531

Company & Directors' Information:- M M RUBBER COMPANY LIMITED [Not available for efiling] CIN = U99999KA1964PLC001541

Company & Directors' Information:- M S PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL1993PTC055125

Company & Directors' Information:- B R PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31909DL1999PTC100727

Company & Directors' Information:- S P B PRODUCTS LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909DL1996PLC082631

Company & Directors' Information:- G K D PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15431WB1998PTC086840

Company & Directors' Information:- B N RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL1994PTC062760

Company & Directors' Information:- M B R PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U17111WB1993PTC060806

Company & Directors' Information:- P D PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U23201DL2000PTC108462

Company & Directors' Information:- K K RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL1984PTC019059

Company & Directors' Information:- B P RUBBER PRIVATE LTD [Active] CIN = U74899DL1986PTC026434

Company & Directors' Information:- S K M PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL1998PTC093415

Company & Directors' Information:- H R PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL1978PTC009183

Company & Directors' Information:- V S PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U36900DL2008PTC185445

Company & Directors' Information:- H K PRODUCTS LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51900GJ2015PLC085457

Company & Directors' Information:- S R K PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51221KA1989PTC010032

Company & Directors' Information:- G M PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1991PTC044687

Company & Directors' Information:- V T N PRODUCTS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U51109WB1996PTC080094

Company & Directors' Information:- W S T Q PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31300DL1999PTC102655

Company & Directors' Information:- J M K PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U24246OR2005PTC008446

Company & Directors' Information:- G S T PRODUCTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U31909TN2006PTC059575

Company & Directors' Information:- S M P PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U25200DL2009PTC190965

Company & Directors' Information:- S N S PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15490DL2005PTC142749

Company & Directors' Information:- U B PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51224DL2002PTC116457

Company & Directors' Information:- A AND A PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U21098MP2004PTC017128

Company & Directors' Information:- V J PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U36900GJ2011PTC065252

Company & Directors' Information:- S AND A PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51311DL1991PTC042938

Company & Directors' Information:- S AND G PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51909DL1982PTC014843

Company & Directors' Information:- B P PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U24241WB1999PTC089499

Company & Directors' Information:- D AND P PRODUCTS LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U99999MH1951PTC008422

Company & Directors' Information:- K D RUBBER PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. [Strike Off] CIN = U25111TN1990PTC019068

Company & Directors' Information:- S D H PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U55204KA2006PTC040734

Company & Directors' Information:- V M PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U24100DL2014PTC266679

Company & Directors' Information:- K G RUBBER (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U25199TN1987PTC014802

Company & Directors' Information:- E C A PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U27209TN1987PTC014022

Company & Directors' Information:- G S PRODUCTS LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U25191UP1989PLC010483

Company & Directors' Information:- S M RUBBER PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U25190BR1990PTC003702

Company & Directors' Information:- A R K PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U24231UP1978PTC004606

Company & Directors' Information:- S. M. PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U17299DL1966PTC004634

Company & Directors' Information:- D P RUBBER PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U25110MH2006PTC159770

Company & Directors' Information:- R. M. R. PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999MH2017PTC298120

Company & Directors' Information:- P & Q PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51909DL2014PTC269162

Company & Directors' Information:- A K RUBBER PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U25191KL1989PTC005539

Company & Directors' Information:- H T PRODUCTS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U29266WB1981PTC033424

Company & Directors' Information:- PRODUCTS (INDIA) LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U31901WB1961PLC024991

Company & Directors' Information:- M PRODUCTS & CO PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U51909WB1956PTC023215

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA RUBBER PRODUCTS P. LTD. [Not available for efiling] CIN = U99999AP2000PTC900697

    Consumer Case No. 448 of 2019

    Decided On, 30 June 2021

    At, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. C. VISWANATH
    By, PRESIDING MEMBER & THE HONOURABLE MR. RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA
    By, MEMBER

    For the Complainant: Navneet Goyal, Advocate. For the Opposite Parties: Navdeep Singh, Advocate.



Judgment Text

1. Heard Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate, for the complainant and Mr. Navdeep Singh, Advocate, for the opposite party.2. M/S P.P. Rubber Product Pvt. Ltd. (the complainant) has filed this complaint for following reliefs:-(a) “Direct the respondent company to pay a sum of Rs. 3,70,72,674/- (Rs. Three crore seventy lakh seventy two thousand six hundred seventy four only) along with the interest @ 18% from date of claim till the actual payment.(b) The respondent company may be directed to pay Rs. 50 lakh towards compensation.(c) Award the cost of the complainant.(d) To pass any order as this Hon’ble Commission deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.”3. The facts as stated in the complaint and emerged from the documents filed by the complainant are that the complainant was a company, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling of footwear, slippers, sport shoes, P.U. Footwear, Hawai and other designer chappals for men and women, using rubber, polyurethane etc., since 1990, in the premises, situated at B- 111 (C) & (D), Road No. 9-C, Vishwakarma Industrial Area, Jaipur. The respondent insured factory and goods of the complainant, under Standard Fire & Special Peril Policy, scheme through Policy No. 33010611150100000319, for the period 13.10.2015 to 12.10.2016. Insurance coverage was extended for the building and superstructure, for Rs.1,00,00,000/-, for the plant, machineries and accessories, for Rs.3,00,00,000/-, for furniture, fittings and fixtures, for Rs.1,00,00,000/- and for stock and stock in process, for Rs. 7,00,00,000/-. On 13.03.2016 at 2.30 pm, fire caught at first floor of the premises, in PU section of finished goods, due to electric short circuit. Electrical sparking fell over cartoons of packed shoes, which soon started burning and immediately engulfed in nearby cartoon stocks and spread to adjoining blocks. It soon took devastating turn and engulfed entire first and second floor, damaging the building, plant, machineries, accessories, stocks of finished and stocks in process goods. Shyam Kedia, Director of the company was present at the premises due to meeting with a customer. As soon as he came to know about the fire through Jagmal Ramkumar, the security guard on duty, he immediately informed Fire Brigade Office. He, along with the staff of the company, who were present there for maintenance work, tried to put off the fire but it was beyond their control. In the meantime about 20-25 fire brigades were diploid by Fire Brigade office, then fire could be put off, which took several hours. The complainant immediately informed the respondent, about the fire incident in his factory through telephone and prayed for making survey, assess the damages and reimburse it under the Insurance Policy. On information, the respondent instructed M/S Apex Insurance Surveyors & Loss Assessors Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur on 13.03.2016 to conduct a preliminary survey and assess the damages of the unit, whose officers visited the factory premises of the company on 13.03.2016 and 14.03.2016 and submitted its report dated 28.03.2016, assessing the damages of Rs. 7 to 8 crores, of the company, in the fire which had accidently taken due to short circuit. The respondent also instructed Mehta & Padamsey Insurance Surveyors & Loss Assessors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi on 15.03.2016 to conduct a survey and assess the damages of the unit, whose officers inspected the premises on 16.03.2016 and 17.03.2016 and submitted their preliminary report on 23.03.2016, with finding that fire had taken place on 13.03.2016 at 14.30 hours, in which, the company sustained damages of Rs. 6.7 crores and assessment of damages for business interruption was reserved for future. Shyam Sundar, the Director of the company, made a complaint to Vishwakarma Police Station, Jaipur on 14.03.2016, on which vide Rapat No. 962 dated 14.03.2016, a case was registered under Section 427 IPC and investigated by SI Manohar Lal, who submitted his report dated 02.04.2016, holding that the fire had taken place due to short circuit and no person was involved in it. On these findings, he recommended for closing of the case. It is alleged that Police Control Room, Jaipur informed Mobile Forensic Unit, Jaipur (Rural) about the incident, whose officers inspected the spot on 21.03.2016 and in spot inspection report dated 30.03.2017, they opined that cause of fire due to electric short circuit in faulty cable could not be ruled out. However, in this report, Investigating Officer of the police was advised to send the materials collected from the spot to State Forensic Laboratory, Jaipur, for chemical examination and final report. No report of State Forensic Laboratory Jaipur was not placed on record by the complainant. The respondent instructed Truth Labs Forensic Service, Mumbai on 17.03.2016 to carry out a detail forensic and field examination to determine the cause of fire in the premises of the complainant on 13.03.2016 at 2.30 pm and submit its report. Expert Team of Truth Labs inspected the premises of the company on 22.03.2016. Detail photography was done and inspection of the scene of incident and burnt materials were made. The samples of debris and burnt materials from the various places of fire were collected. After forensic examination of these samples, Truth Labs submitted its report dated 18.10.2016, holding that fire was not caused due to electrical short circuit or due to chemical and mechanical failure or due to natural fire of lightening of spontaneous combustion but on account of use of extraneous fire accelerants at multiple locations to stage manage the fire. Mehta & Padamsey Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessors Pvt. Ltd. examined the report of Truth Lab in its report dated 01.02.2017 and disagreed with it on the point that the fire had taken place due to use of extraneous fire accelerants at multiple locations to stage manage and assessed net loss of the company of Rs.3,70,72,674/-. The respondent after considering the various reports came to the conclusion that fire had not taken place due to any of the perils covered under the policy but a stage managed one by use of extraneous fire accelerants at multiple locations and repudiated the claim of the complainant through letter dated 31.03.2017. The complainant submitted representation dated 06.04.2017, which was rejected by the respondent on 28.04.2017. The complainant submitted another representation dated 15.05.2017, which was rejected by the respondent on 31.08.2017. The complainant made a representation on 12.01.2018 but nothing was done. Then the present complaint was filed on 15.03.2019, mainly on the ground that the respondent had appointed M/S Mehta and Padamsey Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd., Delhi, for survey of cause of fire and assessment of loss, who after investigation, submitted report dated 01.02.2017, in which it was found that cause of fire was electric short circuit and assessed the loss of the complainant of Rs.3,70,72,674/-. State Forensic Science Laboratory, Jaipur also in its report dated 30.08.2017 has mentioned the cause of fire was electric short circuit. The respondent has illegally ignored these reports and relied upon the report of Truth Lab dated 18.10.2016, which was a manipulated report and has been submitted by the authority, who was incompetent according to the guidelines of Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India.4. The respondent contested the case and filed its written statement on 30.10.2019, in which the facts (i) relating to the business of the complainant at the said address, (ii) Insurance of factory and goods of the complainant, under Standard Fire & Special Peril Policy, scheme through Policy No. 33010611150100000319, for the period 13.10.2015 to 12.10.2016, covering risk for the building and superstructure, for Rs.1,00,00,000/-, for the plant, machineries and accessories, for Rs.3,00,00,000/-, for furniture, fittings and fixtures, for Rs.1,00,00,000/- and for stock and stock in process, for Rs. 7,00,00,000/-. (iii) Information regarding incident of fire on 13.03.2016 at 2.30 pm, at first and second floor of the premises and putting off the fire by Fire Brigade, are not denied. It has been stated that the respondent immediately on 13.03.2016 instructed M/S Apex Insurance Surveyors & Loss Assessors Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur to conduct a preliminary survey and assess the damages of the unit. The respondent also instructed Mehta & Padamsey Insurance Surveyors & Loss Assessors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi on 15.03.2016 to conduct a survey and assess the damages. As it was a third incident of fire in the factory premises of the complainant within a period of 18 months as such in order to find out correct cause of fire, the respondent instructed Truth Lab Forensic Service, Mumbai, which is India’s First Independent Forensic Science Laboratory and has been certified for its excellence service as ISO 9001, from International Organization for Standardization, on 17.03.2016, to carry of a forensic examination of the burnt unit and find out the correct cause of fire. Expert Team of Truth Lab inspected the spot on 22.03.2016 and carried out detail inspection of the scene of incident, recorded the condition of affected premises, plant and machineries, carried its photography and collected samples of debris and burnt remains from the places affected with fire. They also recorded statements of the witnesses. After forensic examination, Truth Lab submitted its report dated 18.10.2016, mentioning therein that (i) C8, C12, C14 and C19 (i.e. hydrocarbons) were found in all the samples of burnt debris, which proved that fire was caused from extraneous fire acceleration such as kerosene or diesel oil and not due to short circuit (ii) On physical examination, one electric switch board of first floor was found superficially burnt and other electrical switches, switch boards and cable was found intact, which ruled out burn from short circuit. (iii) Incident took place on Sunday, which was a holiday for the factory and the machines were not operating as such there was no chance of electric short circuit, (iv) There was no combustible material on the staircase to second floor for spreading the fire to second floor from first floor and (v) At Vishwakarma police station, the case was registered under Section 427 IPC, which ruled out fire took place due to short circuit. On the basis of these reasons, the conclusion was drawn that fire was caused on account of use of extraneous fire accelerants at multiple locations to stage manage the fire. So far as the report of M/S Apex Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd. dated 28.03.2016 is concerned, it has assessed the loss to Rs.7 to 8 crores on oral information and cause of fire was mentioned “as reported due to electric short circuit at the first floor”. Mehta & Padamsey Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd. in its dated 23.03.2016 has noticed that large quantity of stock was stored near switch and starter of the machine at first floor. It was possible that spark from the sudden surge (due to starting & stopping generator and/or frequent disruption of electricity) spark might have fallen on the stocks and fire was caught. On oral information assessed the damages as Rs.6.7 crores. Cause of fire was recorded on information and imagination as such no reliance was placed on it. Report of S.I. Manohar Lal dated 02.04.2016 was based upon statement of the witnesses and not any scientific examination. In the report of Fire Brigade Office cause of fire has not been mentioned. Subsequent report of Mehta & Padamsey Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd., dated 01.02.2017 was a manipulated report and was not reliable. Mobile Forensic Unit, Jaipur (Rural) submitted its report on 30.08.2017. This was not based upon any forensic examination and subsequent to repudiation of the claim of the complainant on 31.03.2017. It has been stated that the complainant has not come with clean hands rather its claim was based upon manipulated report. The complainant was not a consumer within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 nor there was any deficiency of service as such the complaint was not maintainable. Rajesh Poddar, who had signed the complaint, was not a director of the company. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur is necessary party but has not been impleaded and there is a defect of non-joinder of the necessary party. The complaint raises highly complicated questions for determination, which could only be determined by Civil Court after recording oral evidence of the parties. The complainant took unreasonable time in supplying the evidence relating to burnt materials, which shows that the claim was not genuine rather it was a manipulated. As such the complaint be dismissed on these grounds.5. Along with the complaint, the complainant filed Insurance Policy, Report of M/S Apex Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd. dated 28.03.2016, Preliminary report of Mehta & Padamsey Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd. dated 23.03.2016, final report of Mehta & Padamsey Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd. dated 01.02.2017, report of Truth Lab dated 18.10.2016, report of Mobile Forensic Unit Jaipur (Rural) dated 30.08.2017, copy of report of S.I. Manohar Lal dated 02.04.2016, copy of report of Fire Brigade Office, Nagar Nigam Jaipur, details of stock till 31.03.2016, statement of stock as maintained by State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur, copy of the letter dated 03.01.2017, copy of repudiation letter dated 31.03.2017, copies of representations dated 06.04.2017, 28.04.2017 and 15.05.2017, copy of the letter dated 31.08.2017, copies of the letters dated 12.01.2018 and 06.02.2019, photographs of burnt portion of the building and materials, certified copy of resolution of Board of Directors of the company, copy of memorandum of the company, copy of product brochure..6. The respondent filed copy of the Insurance Policy, preliminary report of M/S Apex Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd. dated 28.03.2016, final report of Mehta & Padamsey Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd. dated 01.02.2017, report of Truth Lab dated 18.10.2016, affidavit of Sharda Raj, Deputy Manager of New India Assurance Company Ltd. and affidavit of Dr. Gandhi P.C. Kaza, Chairman of M/S Truth Lab.7. We have considered the arguments of the counsel for the parties and examined the record. Before this Commission, two issues arise for consideration, namely (i) What was the cause of fire, in the incident dated 13.03.2016 at 2.30 pm, in the factory premises of the complainant and (ii) Quantum of loss sustained to the company in this fire incident. Regional Manager, in his letter dated 31.03.2017, repudiated the claim of the complainant on the ground that the fire which had taken place on 13.03.2016 at 2.30 pm in factory premises of the company was not due to any of the perils covered under the policy in question but as stage managed one by use of extraneous fire accelerants at multiple locations. As such we also propose to examine the issue relating to cause of fire, first.8. The complainant relies upon the report M/S Apex Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd. dated 28.03.2016, Preliminary report of Mehta & Padamsey Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd. dated 23.03.2016, final report of Mehta & Padamsey Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd. dated 01.02.2017, report of Mobile Forensic Unit Jaipur (Rural) dated 30.08.2017, report of S.I. Manohar Lal dated 02.04.2016 and report of Fire Brigade Office, Nagar Nigam Jaipur. Opening paragraph of the report dated 28.03.2016, submitted by M/S Apex Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd. reads as “ As per your office instruction we have conducted survey & examined the damages of the above unit at insured premises and collected necessary claim documents for conducting preliminary survey of the aforesaid loss”. The column against “Cause & Circumstances of Loss” reads as “As reported that due to electric short circuit in the first floor PU section of finished goods of stocks placed, electrical sparking fell over cartoon of packing shoes, which soon caught fire and immediately engulfed nearby cartoon stocks & after this fire spread to adjoining blocks and soon took devastating turn engulfing entire first and second floors damaging entire building, plant & machine and all stocks”.From aforesaid passage, it is proved that cause of fire due to electric short circuit was noted only on the basis of report of the Director. In the entire report, there was no independent investigation regarding cause of fire. No reliance can be placed upon this report, for determining the cause of fire in the premises of the company.9. Mehta & Padamsey Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd. in paragraph- 6.02 of its report dated 23.03.2016, has mentioned that it is a possibility that a spark from the sudden surge (due to starting & stopping of Generator and/or frequent disruption of electricity), a spark may have fallen on stocks (packed in corrugated paper cartoon) and caused the fire.This was an assumption regarding cause of fire. They have not found that there was short circuit, which resulted in burning of switch board and cable and this fact was verified by them on the spot.In final report dated 01.02.2017, Mehta & Padamsey Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor Pvt. Ltd., mentioned the Cause of Loss at paragraph-6.00 and which was left blank. Paragraph-11.00 read as “ The Insurer are requested to decide upon their liability based on the facts given by us in “Para No. 6.00- Cause of loss” of our report. Thus it has avoided to mention cause of fire in the report dated 01.02.2017.10. The complainant has filed report of SI Manohar Lal, P.S. Vishwakarma, Jaipur (West) dated 02.04.2016. In this report, statements of Shyam Sundar, Jagmal, Vijendra Meena and Pankaj witnesses were mentioned and relied upon. On its basis, it has been found that the fire was caused due to electric short circuit. In the report of Fire Brigade Office, Nagar Nigam, Jaipur, it has been mentioned that in FIR of the incident, cause of fire was mentioned as electric short circuit. It is not an independent opinion of Fire Brigade Office, based upon any material. The complainant heavily relies upon the report of Mobile Forensic Unit Jaipur dated 30.08.2017 and submits that this report was based upon report of State Forensic Science Laboratory, Jaipur. But a perusal of the report dated 30.08.2017, shows that it was a spot inspection report of P.M. Sharma, In-charge of Mobile Forensic Unit, Jaipur (Rural). In this report, it has been mentioned that Investigating Officer of Police was advised to send main switch board along with cable and other goods affected with fire to State Forensic Science Laboratory, Jaipur, for its chemical examination. It is a highly suspicious document. Although in this report date of inspection was mentioned as 21.03.2016 i.e. one day prior to inspection of expert team of Truth Lab but inspection report was prepared on 30.08.2017, while the Investigating Officer had already submitted Final Report on 02.04.2016 for closing the case. In any case, this report is not based upon forensic examination report of State Forensic Science Laboratory, Jaipur, as alleged. The complaint could not adduce any evidence to rebut the re

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

port of Truth Lab dated 18.10.2016.11. Truth Lab, in its report dated 18.10.2016, at paragraph-4 of Observations and Findings has noted as “ Electrical panel board in the first floor was found superficially burnt while the electrical cable was found intact. Its photograph has also been shown. At paragraph-5 noted as “electrical switches and switch board in the first floor was found intact. Its photograph has been shown. Apart from above facts, Truth Lab, in its report dated 18.10.2016, has given reasons that (i) C8, C12, C14 and C19 (i.e. hydrocarbons) were found in all the samples of burnt debris, which proved that fire was caused from extraneous fire acceleration such as kerosene or diesel oil and not due to short circuit (ii) On physical examination, one electric switch board of first floor was found superficially burnt and other electrical switches, switch boards and cable was found intact, which ruled out burn from short circuit. (iii) Incident took place on Sunday, which was a holiday for the factory and the machines were not operating as such there was no chance of electric short circuit, (iv) There was no combustible material on the staircase to second floor for spreading the fire to second floor from first floor and (v) At Vishwakarma police station, the case was registered under Section 427 IPC, which ruled out fire took place due to short circuit. On its basis, it has formed opinion that the fire had not taken place due to electric short circuit.It is alleged that through a steel ramp, fire spread over second from first floor. But it does not inspire any confidence.12. The complainant has failed to prove that the fire, which had taken place on 13.03.2016 at 2.30 pm at his factory premises was due to any of the perils covered in the Insurance Policy. In view of aforementioned discussions, we do not find any illegality in the order of the respondent dated 31.03.2017, repudiating the Insurance claim of the complainant. On the aforesaid finding, we have no need to decide other issue relating to quantum of loss.O R D E RIn view of the aforesaid discussion, the complaint has no merit and is dismissed. The parties will bear their own cost.
O R