Keywords: Supreme Court of India, NCDRC, Insurance Company, Consumer Dispute
The Supreme Court has set aside a National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) order, stating that it relied only on selective portions of expert reports in a case. The court in a matter of SS Cold Storage India Pvt Ltd vs National Insurance Company Ltd partially allowed a cold storage company’s appeal against an NCDRC order refusing it a payout from an insurance company. The court criticized the NCDRC for making observations as if they were experts sitting in appeal on the reports of the Loss Assessor and the Experts.
The Incident leading to the consumer dispute dated back to 1997. The appellant, SS Cold Storage India Private Limited, had taken various insurance policies for its constituent units from the National Insurance Company Limited. A leakage of ammonia in the company’s facilities led to damage of large quantities of potatoes stored. The insurance company concluded that the damage was not covered by insurance due to wear and tear of pipes, not sudden burst. However, the reports of experts and a loss assessor appointed by the appellant company indicated otherwise.
The NCDRC refused to grant the cold storage company any relief and relied on the surveyor’s conclusions and portions of other reports to rule in the insurance company’s favor. The Supreme Court ultimately leaned in favor of the appellant’s explanation that the leakage was due to an unforeseen accident covered by insurance.
The court held that the NCDRC committed a serious error by not giving the reports placed on record by the appellant the extent of credence the same deserved. The manner in which the NCDRC dealt with such reports was not proper and legal, with major parts of the reports being rejected and only stray observations relied upon to support the conclusions.
Written by- Apoorva Chandra, College name – Aligarh Muslim University Centre, Malappuram, Semester- 3rd an intern under Legal Vidhiya
