9911796707
TMI Blog1957 (11) TMI 33X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant as the borrower and in case oi failure to do so the Bank was at liberty to effect such insurances at the expense of the borrower. This agreement referred to insurance against fire risk. It was also agreed that all sums received under any such insurances would be applied towards liquidation o the balance due to the Bank for the time being. In accordance with the terms of the above agreement, Exhibit K-2/1, dated 14th of December, 1944, these goods were got insured against fire by the Bank with the respondent Company under two policies. Policy No. C 15012 was for ₹ 23,000/- covering risk against fire from 25th of May, 1947, to 25th of May, 1948 and it also covered ALL RIOT RISKS for 30 days as from llth of July, 1947, to 10th of August, 1947 (vide Exhibit R-1). The other Policy No. C 15025 was for ₹ 75.000/- against fire from 13th of July, 1947 to 13th of October, 1947, and it also covered ALL RIOT RISKS from 13th of July, 1947 to 12th of August, 1947, (vide Exhibit R-2). It is stated that the goods insured under those two policies were lost during communal riots in August, 1947, and the respondent Company having refused to admit the claim on the gro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bility o the Insurance Company had been established, the amount was payable to the Bank in preference to Messrs. Chuni Lal Dwarka Nath appellant. The fifth issue was found in favour of the appellant and the sixth, against the Insurance Company. the seventh issue did not arise and on the eighth, it was held that policy No. C 15012 was not in force on the date of the looting. In view of the above findings, the Tribunal by its order dated 5th of May, 1955, rejected the claim of the appellant and also of the Bank, and dismissed both the applications with costs. 5. Section 18(6) of the Displaced Persons (Debts Adjustment) Act, 1951, requires that an application shall not be entertained unless the claim has been made to the Insurance Company within one year after the date of the loss. Explanation to Sub-section (6) provides that a claim shall be deemed to have been made within the meaning of the sub-section if intimation thereof has been given to the insurance company within one year after the date of the loss notwithstanding that the intimation does not specify the amount of the claim or is not in the form, if any, required by the contract of insurance or in any other specified f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... motion risks might have been destroyed form 13th of August, 1947, onwards. Details could only be ascertained when the circumstances permit. The company was requested to arrange inspection and survey of the losses. Second paragraph of this letter reads as under : We are informed by our Sialkot manager that a telegram was sent to yon on 17th or so regarding various claims and also a letter was sent to you dated 17-8-1947 (copy enclosed for reference) making the necessary claims, regarding cases in which information could be available by that time. The details regarding these and other cases could not be known as there was no safety or security in the towns and lawlessness prevailed like anything. This shall be supplied when normal conditions are restored. It was also stated that information and details regarding other offices would be supplied when the writer would get into contact with branch officials on the restoration of normal conditions. 8. The Tribunal has attached no value to these documents on the ground that they were couched in vague and ambiguous language and are not covered by the language of Section 18(6) of the Act. To me, these two documents appear to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Company was compelled to close its office, it could have notified to the policy-holders, whose addresses were known to it, that they should communicate the losses at some other office in India. It is not the Company's case that they invited claims from the policy holders at some other office. The plea of not receiving intimation of loss is, therefore, not tenable. S. Sujan Singh, who was the Manager of Sialkot Branch, has appeared as P. W. 6 and has stated on oath that he sent the communication mentioned above to the Insurance Company. There is no reason to suggest that he is not making a truthful statement. Sohan Singh, who was the Bank's employee at Amritsar Branch, stated that the letter, copy of which is Exhibit R-2/2, was posted to Lahore and he made an entry in the despatch register maintained by the Bank. He made this statement after looking at the original despatch register produced in Court. This letter, Sohan Singh gave to Hira Singh peon for posting. 10. It is contended by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company that the above evidence does not prove posting of the letter front Amritsar to his client's Lahore Office. According to Section 16 of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y as alleged. The eighth issue is as to whether policy No. C-15012 was in force on the date of the loss. Policy No. C-15012 was affective up to 10th of August, 1947, and policy No. C-15025 up to 12th of August, 1947. It is argued that the loss took place on llth of August, 1647, when the goods were said to have been looted, According to P.W. I Ram Rakha Mal, P.W. 2 Yodh Raj, P.W. 3 Bhim Sain, and P. W. 4 Amin Chand, the stock was looted on 8th and 9th of August, 1917, P. Ws 1, 2 and 4 were eye-witnesses and saw the foods being looted. P. W. 1 stated that the stock of the appellant was in the godown of his brother Jiwan Shah in the letters factory contiguous to the witness' factory. P. W. 2 Yodh Raj stated that the stock of the appellant was kept in Jiwan Shah's place and also in the place of Thakar Das Makhan Lal and was looted on 8th and 9th of August, 1947, and he himself saw the looting. The looting was also seen personally by P. W. 4 Amin Chand. P. W. 3 Bhim Sain stated that the goods of the appellant were stocked in the godown of Jiwan Shah and also in the godown of Thakar Das Makhan Lal, that it was widely rumored that the stock of Chuni Lal had been looted, and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een drawn by Mr. Khullar, learned counsel for the Insurance Company, that according to Chuni Lal's statement before issues, his stock was looted on llth of August, 1947. This appears to be an erroneous statement. My attention has also been drawn by Mr. Khullar to a letter of Chuni Lal, Exhibit R-l/I, addressed to the Insurance Company in which he stated that the goods were either looted or destroyed by fire on or about 12th of August, 1947. Tf he were an eye-witness or had personal knowledge of the looting, he might have been pinned to the above statement as to the date when the looting had taken place, but I cannot prefer his erroneous statement to the testimony of three eye-witnesses, according to whom the goods were looted on 8th and 9th of August, 1947. I, therefore, hold that the looting took place on 8th and 9th of August, 1947, when both the policies were in force. 16. I may here add that the insurance of the goods was against loss resulting from riots and the date of loss may conceivably precede the date of looting. The word loss has not a precise hard and fast meaning. It is a generic and a comprehensive term covering different situations. Loss results when a t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No arguments were addressed on any other issue by the learned counsel for the parties. 21. Issue No. 4 : Issue No. 4, which was a contentious point between the appellant and the Punjab Sind Bank Limited, no longer requires decision on merits. Under Section 18(3) of Act No. 70 of 1951, the amount realized from the insurance company under any decree passed under Sub-section (2) shall first be applied towards satisfaction of the debt due from the displaced person and the balance, if any, shall be refunded to the displaced person. Both Mr. K.S. Thapar counsel for the appellant and Mr. K.L. Kapur counsel for the Punjab Sind Bank, Limited, have stated before me today that the parties have settled the dispute and in case the appeal is to be allowed the insurance money may be divided between the Bank and the appellant in the ratio of 75 per cent, and 25 per cent, respectively and decrees passed accordingly in favour of the appellant for ₹ 24,500/- and in favour of the Punjab and Sind Bank, Limited for ₹ 73,500/- against the Hartford Fire Insurance Co., Limited. 22. In the result, I pass a decree in favour of the appellant, Messrs. Chuni Lal Dwarka Nath, for ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
