Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
V.B. Gupta, Presiding Member and Suresh Chandra, Member
H.C. SAXENA - Appellant
Versus
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANR. - Respondents
Revision Petition No. 2204 of 2010 against Order dated 19.2.2010 in First Appeal No. 423 of 2007 of Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula
Decided on : 03-01-2012
Authorised Representative., for the Appellant; Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate, for the Respondent
The report of the surveyor appointed under the provisions of the Insurance Act is crucial and should not be disregarded without compelling evidence to the contrary.
Headnote:
Insurance - Car Insurance - Insurance Act - Section 42, Section 45 - The court discussed the assessment reports of two surveyors, the importance of the report of the surveyor appointed under the provisions of the Insurance Act, and the necessity for the complainant to cooperate with the official surveyor. The court emphasized the significance of the report of the official surveyor and the need for compelling evidence to disregard it. The decision was influenced by the interpretation of the Insurance Act provisions and the assessment reports.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner's car was insured and got damaged due to heavy floods. The petitioner sought compensation for the damages from the insurance company, but the company resisted the claim, citing non-compliance with formalities.
Finding of the Court:
The District Forum accepted the complaint and directed the insurance company to pay compensation. The State Commission modified the reliefs granted by the District Forum, awarding a reduced amount of compensation.
Issues: Dispute over the extent of damage to the car, non-compliance with formalities, and the assessment reports of the surveyors.
Ratio Decidendi: The report of the surveyor appointed under the provisions of the Insurance Act is important and cannot be ignored without compelling evidence to the contrary. The complainant is required to cooperate with the official surveyor.
Final Decision: The revision petition was dismissed, upholding the State Commission's order.
ORDER
Suresh Chandra, Member - This revision petition has been filed by the complainant. The petitioner had insured his car Opel Corsa Royale 1.6 with the respondent/opposite party-Insurance Company for a sum of Rs. 7,33,450 vide insurance policy dated 20.9.2003. On 3.8.2004, heavy flood came in Ambala due to which the aforesaid car of the petitioner got drowned/submerged in water and hence badly damaged. Necessary information regarding the damage to the car was given by the petitioner to the respondent on 5.8.2004, upon which the respondent deputed a Surveyor, namely, Ravi Kumar Gupta, who assessed the damage to the car to the tune of Rs. 42,276. However, according to the petitioner, he had spent a sum of Rs. 1,50,000 on the repairs of his car besides other expenses incurred on the cost of oil to the tune of Rs. 7,000, loss of business for three months @ 25,000 per month thereby amounting to Rs. 75,000, compensation on account of mental agony and harassment at Rs. 1,50,000, cost of towing of the car Rs. 15,000 and litigation expenses Rs. 5,000. Therefore, the petitioner sought compensation from the respondent-company to this extent.
2. Upon notice, the opposite party-respondent resisted the claim of the complainant by denying his version and took the plea that the Surveyor had prepared and submitted his report on 30.8.2005 and calculated the total loss of Rs. 42,276 but the complainant failed to comply with the required formalities i.e. deposit of salvage with the opposite party-company, execution of the discharge voucher, submission of the original bills, etc. and hence the Claim of the complainant could not be settled. Thus, denying any deficiency in service on its part, the opposite party prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. On appraisal of the issues and evidence adduced by the parties on record, the District Forum accepted the complaint vide its order dated 11.1.2007 in terms of the following directions:
"Resultantly, the complaint succeeds and the same is hereby allowed with costs. The OP is directed to comply with the following orders within 30 days from the receipt of the copy of order:
(i) To pay Rs. 86,549 with interest @12% P.A. from the date of intimation given to OP about loss i.e. 5.8.2004 till realization
(ii) To pay Rs. 10,000 for harassment and mental agony suffered by the complainant.
(iii) To pay Rs. 2,500 on account of litigation charges."
4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the District Forum, the respondent/opposite party-company challenged the same by filing an appeal before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana, Panchkula (in short, the 'state Commission'). The State Commission vide its order 19.2.2010 disposed of the appeal and modified the reliefs granted by the District Forum in terms of the following order:
"Admittedly, in the present case the Insurance Company had appointed Shri Ravi Kumar Gupta, Surveyor who assessed the damage to the vehicle of the complainant to the tune of Rs. 42,276. Thus, we feel that the ends of justice would be met suitably if the complainant is awarded an amount of Rs. 42,276 as assessed by the Surveyor, along with interest @ 8% per annum on the compensation amount from the date of filing of the complaint till its realization and we order accordingly. Rest of the order of the District Forum is maintained.
5. Aggrieved by the modification in the reliefs granted by the District Forum through the impugned order, the complainant/petitioner has now challenged the same by the present revision petition.
6. We have heard Mr. N. Kumar, Attorney appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned Counsel for the respondent-company. It is not in dispute that the car in question belonging to the petitioner was insured and got damaged as a result of the floods, which occurred in the Ambala City on the given date. The controversy involved in the matter is in respect of two different assessments regarding the extent of damage to the car done by the two surveyor
