Seven years after it suffered heavy losses in the July 26, 2005 deluge in the city, a trading firm from Santacruz East is set to recover Rs 32.85 lakh as insurance claim and compensation.
The Maharashtra State Consumer Forum last week directed New India Assurance Company Ltd to pay Steel & Steel Traders' a claim amount of Rs 20.15 lakh, with interest at the rate of 9% per annum calculated from December 2005.
During the 26/7 deluge, the complainant firm, which trades in various types of laminates for transformers, had suffered heavy losses after some of their stock was swept away and the rest submerged.
Soon after, the firm lodged an insurance claim with New India Assurance Company Ltd. The insurance company then appointed a surveyor to examine the insured premises.
The surveyor assessed the loss at Rs 20.15 lakh. The company, however, repudiated the claim. The trader then approached the consumer commission.
The trading firm contended that he had sustained losses to the tune of Rs 28.21 lakh, owing to damages caused in the deluge. However, the insurance company justified its decision to deny the claim, stating that the firm had provided no particulars about the loss sustained.
It further contended that their surveyor had doubted some of the bills and documents provided by the trader.
The consumer commission, however, said that the surveyor had arrived at the loss amount after verifying amounts, sale and purchase records, bank stock statements, purchase bills and other relevant documents.
It concluded that the bills and records had been cross-checked and accepted by the surveyor before making the assessment of loss, and therefore, the insurance company's grounds for repudiation were not only improper, but also showed that it was acting arbitrarily.
The commission, however, also discarded the complainant's claim - that the firm had suffered damages to the tune of Rs 28.21 lakh. The commission found that there was no evidence to back this amount and accepted the extent of loss as assessed by the surveyor.
It also directed the insurance company to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum, by way of compensation for mental agony suffered by the complainant firm.