Supreme Court says – Fire is Fire – Insurer Cannot Evade Claim on Technical Grounds
The Respondent was given contract dated 21.7.2006 of centralized insurance of Fire and Special Perils Policy for CO Unit and Zonal Units of the petitioner.
On 1.11.2006, the theft and fire incident had occurred at the cement factory of the appellant at Mandhar, Chhattisgarh.
On 30.1.2007, the appellant filed claim of Rs.2,20,14,190/-.
On 10.12.2027, the final survey report was given that the cause falls under the exclusion clause of the policy i.e. riots, strike, malicious and damage.
On 4.1.2008, the claim was repudiated that the proximate cause of loss was burglary.
HELD that the Insurer had assured to indemnify the loss by any of the perils specified in the policy. In the specified peril of Fire, the exclusion clause does not include “burglary / theft.
Once it is not disputed that the loss is caused by fire, then the cause igniting the fire becomes immaterial. If the damage is cused by fire, then the reason by which the fire took place becomes irrelevant. The exclusion of RSMD was not an exclusion clause in the specified peril of Fire. Moreover, the record shows that the loss was caused by fire only and the incident of theft / burglary merely preceded the incident fire.
In the policy, theft / burglary is not an exclusion under the specified peril of fire, the general exclusion of RSMD clause does not apply. It would not oust the liability of the insurer when the loss is attributable to the peril of fire which has its independent exclusions.
Judgment dated 16.12.2025 of the Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.2052 of 2016 of Cement Corporation of India Vs. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited
