IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5412 of 2009 M/S DEBASHREE CONSTRUCTIONS(INDIA) PVT. LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NEW AREA, NAWAJADIK COMPLEX, OLD G.T. ROAD, AURANGABAD, BIHAR THROUGH IT’S MANAGING DIRECTOR SMT. GEETA SINGH, WIFE OF SRI KAUSHAL KUMAR SINGH, RESIDENT OF NEW AREA, AURANGABAD, BIHAR. Versus 1. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 3 MIDDLETON STREET, P.O. BOX NO.9229, KOLKATA- 700071 THROUGH ITS ZONAL MANAGER. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. BRANCH OFFICE- MAHARAJGANJ ROAD, NEW AREA, AURANGABAD, BIHAR. 3. THE IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD., A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA UNDERTAKING HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT PLOT NO. C-4, DISTRICT CENTRE, SAKET, NEW DELHI- 110017, THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR (PROJECTS). 4. THE JOINT GENERAL MANAGER, IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD., 1ST FLOOR, SONE BHAWAN, DAROGA PRASAD RAI PATH, PATNA. ----------- 6. 10.2.2010. In the present case based on the surveyor’s report, it has emerged that the claim made by the petitioner for payment of ensured amount is covered by the policy and the period indicated therein. But the final settlement of the claim is going to be based on the identification of the reasons for such damage, which has not crystallized in the report of the surveyor. Petitioner has been requested to furnish any documentary evidence of flood in the area which led to the loss or damage to the road project in question, during the construction period. If that be so then the ball is in the court of the petitioner and it is for the - 2 - petitioner now to furnish evidence in this regard at the earliest. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a letter dated 8.5.2009 has been addressed to them by the Insurance Company asking them to furnish a report by the B.D.O. of the area in support of his claim. He submits that the B.D.O. of the area is not willing to cooperate with the petitioner and if the Insurance Company insist on evidence only from the B.D.O. then he faces difficulty in this regard. This Court can only observe taking into consideration the surveyor’s report coupled with Annexure-B that B.D.O’s certificate could be one of the evidence but the communication by itself does not bar the petitioner from obtaining any evidence authentic in nature to substantiate his claim. If the B.D.O. is not willing to cooperate in the matter, it does not mean the petitioner is precluded from providing any other evidence in support of his claim. The insurance company shall not insist for a report from B.D.O. - 3 - N.H./ Let the petitioner do the needful at the earliest in terms of furnishing evidence Insurance Company shall do the needful at the shortest possible time thereafter. With the aforesaid observation, the writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)