A. Raman, President — The comp-lainant preferred a claim to the opposite party the Insurer to recover the damages sustained by him when the lorry belon-ging to him and which was insured with the opposite party met with an accident and was damaged. The opposite parties accepted the claim only in a sum of Rs. 13,375/- and hence the complaint.

2. The complaint is not maintai-nable for the reason that there is no defi-ciency in service in this case. The claim preferred by the complainant has been accepted by the opposite party though it was only for a sum of Rs, 13,375/- as against the claim of Rs. 79,530.70. Therefore, if at all, the complainant disputes only the quantum. Therefore, his remedy will be elsewhere and on this short ground the complaint is liable to be dismissed. Even otherwise, we do not find any material from the complainant’s side to show that the complainant incurred an expenditure of Rs. 79,530/- towards repair of the lorry. In the complaint, it is stated that the lorry met with an accident on 28-12-1998. Of course, the opposite party would say in their version that the lorry met with an accident on 23-4-1998. We are pointing out this fact only to highlight the h