In Brief
Mahavir Road and Infrastructure claimed insurance coverage for road damage allegedly caused by heavy rainfall and water logging in June–July 2007. The insurer rejected the claim, citing normal wear and tear and atmospheric degradation exclusions. The NCDRC dismissed the consumer complaint. On appeal, the Supreme Court upheld the rejection, finding that meteorological data showed rainfall within normal parameters, the surveyor found only surface damage with no flood evidence, and the insured failed to produce expert testimony on causation. The Court held that where a policy excludes normal wear and tear, the insured must prove damage was caused by a covered peril; here, the evidence supported wear from traffic on wet roads, not abnormal rainfall."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.