The claim of an infrastructure company that sought compensation from its insurer alleging damage to roads because of excessive rainfall was rejected as meteorological data showed that there was little rain on those days. In Mahavir Road & Infrastructure Ltd vs Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co, the infrastructure company had undertaken the resurfacing, metaling and asphalting of roads in Nashik. It took out an insurance policy covering ‘material damage’ but excluding ‘normal were and tear’.
The company claimed compensation from the insurer for damage to the roads due to “abnormal rainfall and water logging”. The claim was rejected on the ground that the damage had been caused by defective workmanship and there was no rain on the days mentioned by the builder.
The dispute led to a complaint before the National Consumer Commission. The commission rejected the claim relying on the survey report which stated that there was only surface damage and there was no washout due to rain. On appeal, the Supreme Court again rejected the claim, asserting that the evidence showed that the claim was baseless.
