A. Insurance law -- Standard Fire and Special Perils Insurance Policy – Cause of fire – Ground of -- Once it is not disputed that the loss is caused by fire, then the cause igniting the fire becomes immaterial -- Insurer cannot refuse to indemnify the damage caused by fire, which is a specified peril, on the ground that the proximate cause of fire was burglary/ theft (which is excluded under the RSMD clause), particularly when no such exclusion is provided in the specified peril “Fire”.

(Para 20)

B. Insurance law -- Standard Fire and Special Perils Insurance Policy – Cause of fire – Ground of -- Loss occurred on account of the transformer being set ablaze and the fire could not be controlled for about 6 hours –  On the intervening night of 01.11.2006, some miscreants entered the factory and committed burglary -- It was reported in the FIR that flames were coming out of the transformer and at no stage any defense was taken that the insured caused the fire -- Loss caused to the Appellant was due to fire only and the incident of theft/ burglary merely preceded the incident of fire -- Burglary/theft is not an exclusion under the specified peril “Fire” -- Even, the general exclusions to the policy do not cover theft which precedes the insured peril as an exclusion and the said exclusion is only provided under the RSMD clause -- It is a trite law that the exclusions in the contract for insurance must be read strictly and, therefore, the exclusion provided under the RSMD clause would not oust the liability of the insurer when the loss or damage is attributable to the peril of fire which has its independent exclusions – Matter remitted back to NCDRC to assess the loss.

(Para 25-30)