The main legal point established in the judgment is the validity of the Insurance Company's repudiation of the claim based on the breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy.

Mr. Justice Surendra Kumar, Acting President—This is an appeal against the order dated 19.4.2005 passed by the District Forum, Almora whereby the complaint of the complainant was allowed for a sum of Rs. 2,30,000 along with interest @ 9% from 28.3.2003, i.e., the date of repudiation of claim till the date of actual payment. The appellant was further directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 10,000 and costs of litigation of Rs. 1,000. The complainant was directed not to return the salvage to the Insurance Company. It was further directed that if the amount is not paid within a month, the Insurance Company shall pay interest @ 12% on the total amount from 4.11.2003 till the date of payment.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant purchased a Marshal Jeep No. UP01/5818 on 22.5.2000 after taking a loan from Almora Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. It was insured for a sum of Rs. 4,06,000 with the opposite party for the period from 22.5.2001 to 21.5.2002. It is alleged that on 18.4.2002 the vehicle while coming to Almora from Bareilly met with an accident and the vehicle was totally damaged and it was not repairable. Information was given to the Insurance Company. The claim was lodged with the Insurance Company for the whole insured amount as a case of total loss. The Insurance Company appointed Surveyor and Investigator but did not pay the claim and at last on 28.3.2003 repudiated the claim on the ground that investigation is to be done. Thereafter the complainant filed the complaint before the learned Forum.

3. Before the learned Forum, the Insurance Company filed written statement and admitted the insurance and accident. It is alleged that at the time of accident the vehicle was being driven against the terms of insurance. The vehicle was being used as a goods carrier, therefore, the claim was repudiated.

4. The parties filed their affidavits and other relevant documents in support of their allegations. The learned Forum after taking the evidence of the parties and hearing them, passed the above order, against which the present appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company.

5. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the records. The only dispute in the present case is whether at the time of accident the vehicle was being driven against the terms and conditions of the policy? The learned Counsel for the appellant filed written arguments. In para 2, it is alleged that the Insurance Company had repudiated the claim on the ground of breach of terms and conditions of the policy based on the reports of spot Surveyor and final Surveyor, Investigator’s report and other documents wherein it was observed that the vehicle was loaded with 12 baskets of Khoya, bundles of Dainik Jagran newspaper (estimated weight 3.60 quintals of Khoya plus weight of newspapers) besides 7 passengers were sitting in the vehicle at the time of accident, whereas the registration certificate and insurance policy of the vehicle was for passenger carrying vehicle (taxi purpose not for goods carrying). It was further alleged that the complainant should return the salvage to the company and also transfer the vehicle in the name of the company. At page 2 of the written arguments, it is said that the District Forum has wrongly allowed the claim of the complainant on market value of the vehicle. As per the survey report the claim was assessed at Rs. 89,000 after deducting the salvage of the vehicle. The cost of the salvage is Rs. 1,40,000 and the District Forum awarded the amount of Rs. 2,30,000. In this connection, the learned Counsel for the Insurance Company referred a case decided by this Commission reported in 2004 (1) UC 607, in which it was held that the Insurance Company is bound by the report of its Surveyor. It was further held in that case that in case of total loss, the complainant should return the salvage to the Insurance Company and transfer the vehicle in the name of the Insurance Company. It is further alleged t