Supreme Court Overturns NCDRC Ruling in Rs. 151 Crore Insurance Claim Case

The Supreme Court of India has overturned the decision of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Hyundai Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd. & Ors., ruling in favor of the insurance company. The case involved a high-stakes insurance dispute over a claim of Rs. 151.59 crore related to the collapse of a bridge during construction. The Supreme Court found that the NCDRC erred in allowing the insurance claim and held that the exclusion clauses in the policy justified repudiation of the claim.

Background of the Case

The dispute arose from a contract awarded by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) for the construction of a cable-stayed bridge across the Chambal River on NH-76 in Kota, Rajasthan. The project was awarded to a joint venture between Hyundai Engineering & Infrastructure Co. Ltd. and Gammon India. The contractor obtained a Contractor’s All Risk Insurance Policy from United India Insurance Co. Ltd., covering risks during construction.

Chronology of Events

December 2007: Construction of the Chambal bridge commenced.
December 24, 2009: A section of the bridge collapsed, resulting in the death of 48 workers.
December 29, 2009: NHAI informed the insurer and sought indemnification.
January 6, 2010: A surveyor was appointed to assess the damages.
August 7, 2010: The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways submitted an Expert Committee Report identifying design flaws as a major factor in the collapse.
April 21, 2011: The insurer repudiated the claim, citing exclusion clauses.
April 17, 2017: The insurer reaffirmed the repudiation after reviewing additional reports.
January 24, 2019: The contractor filed a consumer complaint before the NCDRC.
January 16, 2023: The NCDRC ruled in favor of the contractor and awarded Rs. 151.59 crore.
May 16, 2024: The Supreme Court set aside the NCDRC’s ruling, dismissing the claim.

Legal Issues Considered

The Supreme Court examined several key legal questions:

Whether the exclusion clauses in the insurance policy justified the repudiation of the claim.
Whether the NCDRC erred in ruling that the insurer was liable for the damages.
Whether the contractor’s failure to adhere to approved design specifications voided the claim.

Arguments by the Appellant (United India Insurance Co. Ltd.)

The insurer contended that:

The policy explicitly excluded coverage for losses arising from faulty design and workmanship defects.
The Expert Committee Report found that the collapse resulted from design flaws and non-compliance with construction protocols.
The insurer had valid grounds to repudiate the claim under the terms of the policy.
The NCDRC erroneously relied on independent expert reports that were not formally admitted as evidence.

Arguments by the Respondent (Hyundai Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd. & Ors.)

The contractor argued that:

The claim should have been honored as the collapse was caused by unforeseen circumstances, not design flaws.
The reports relied upon by the insurer were inconclusive and did not definitively establish negligence.
The NHAI had allowed the contractor to continue construction, indicating that it did not consider the contractor to be at fault.

Supreme Court’s Judgment

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the insurer, overturning the NCDRC’s order and dismissing the contractor’s claim. The Court held:

“There is sufficient evidence to justify repudiation of the claim on the basis of the exclusion clause. On the other hand, there is absolutely no evidence on behalf of the respondents.”

The Court found that the contractor had deviated from approved designs, leading to structural instability.
The Expert Committee’s findings were based on credible engineering analyses and supported the insurer’s decision to deny the claim.
The NCDRC erred in disregarding the surveyor’s report, which was based on site visits and extensive investigation.
The reliance on independent reports that were not formally admitted as evidence was improper.

Impact of the Judgment

The ruling has several significant implications:

Strict Enforcement of Insurance Contracts: The judgment reinforces that insurance claims must strictly adhere to policy terms and exclusions.
Judicial Scrutiny of Consumer Cases: The Supreme Court has reaffirmed that consumer forums must base decisions on admissible evidence.
Precedent for Infrastructure Disputes: The ruling clarifies liability issues in construction projects covered by insurance.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Hyundai Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd. & Ors. establishes a critical precedent for insurance disputes in infrastructure projects. By upholding the insurer’s repudiation of the claim, the Court has reinforced the principle that policyholders must comply with contract terms, and consumer forums must adhere to strict evidentiary standards when adjudicating insurance disputes.

Petitioner Name: United India Insurance Co. Ltd..
Respondent Name: Hyundai Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd. & Ors..
Judgment By: Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Justice Aravind Kumar.
Place Of Incident: Kota, Rajasthan.
Judgment Date: 16-05-2024.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: united-india-insuran-vs-hyundai-engineering-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-16-05-2024.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in Commercial Insurance Disputes
See all petitions in Judgment by P.S. Narasimha
See all petitions in Judgment by Aravind Kumar
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Quashed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments May 2024
See all petitions in 2024 judgments

See all posts in Insurance Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Insurance Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Insurance Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Insurance Cases Category