As per the case facts an insurance company repudiated a claim from Levi Strauss India Pvt Ltd which had two fire and special perils policies and a global policy The ... National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission allowed Levi's insurance claim The insurer appealed to the Supreme Court The question arose whether Levi could claim more than what it received from one insurer particularly when it had multiple policies covering similar risks and had already received substantial amounts for damaged goods Finally the Supreme Court allowed the appeal setting aside the NCDRC's order and dismissing Levi's complaint The court emphasized that a contract of insurance is a contract of indemnity meaning the insured should be fully indemnified for a loss but never more than fully indemnified Levi's attempt to distinguish between policies was not supported by their terms and the facts showed Levi had already received significant amounts