Back
JHARKHAND STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Dhananjay Prasad Singh, President, Vidyut Prabha Singh and Mohan Lal Roy, Members
SHIVA KANT PANDEY - Appellant
Versus
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. AND ORS. - Respondents
Decided on : 11-02-2011
M/s. P. Jaiswal and R. Kumar, Advocates, for the Appellant; M/s. A.K. Das and C. Mukherjee, Advocates, for the Respondent
The legal principle established is that the Surveyor's report must have a basis for its conclusions, and if such basis is lacking, it cannot be accepted as evidence.
Headnote:
Insurance - Vehicle Insurance - Use of vehicle for commercial purpose - Surveyor's report lacking basis for conclusion - Appeal allowed and case remanded for fresh consideration
Fact of the Case:
The appellant's insured vehicle was damaged and a claim for repair costs was repudiated by the insurance company on the grounds of commercial use.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Surveyor's report lacked basis for concluding that the vehicle was being used for commercial purposes, and therefore set aside the lower forum's decision and remanded the case for fresh consideration.
Issues: Dispute over the use of the insured vehicle for commercial purpose and the acceptance of the Surveyor's report as evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Surveyor's report lacked the basis of inspection of the damaged vehicle and therefore could not be accepted as evidence to support the conclusion of commercial use.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed without cost, and the case was remanded back to the lower forum for fresh consideration within four months.
ORDER
Dhananjay Prasad Singh, President - This appeal by Shri Shiva Kant Pandey challenges the order dated 2.9.2008 by which District Consumer Fora, Bokaro dismissed the Complaint Case No. 64 of 2007 filed by him against the OP/respondents.
2. Admittedly the Bolero Jeep Lx-bearing Bokaro Registration No. JH-09G-6069, owned by the complainant/appellant was insured with the OP/respondent when it met with an accident on 8.7.2007. As the vehicle was badly damaged, it was brought to M/s. Auto Planet Industry, Dhanbad for repairs and repairing cost estimated at Rs. 2,75,359. As required a claim was lodged for reimbursement of the cost of repairs as per policy of insurance. The OP/respondent repudiated it on 14.8.2007 alleging, the vehicle was being used for commercial purpose. Hence this case.
3. The OP/respondent appeared on notice to deny any deficiency and further alleged the vehicle was used for commercial purpose. The learned lower Forum relying on the Surveyor's report held the use of the insured vehicle for commercial purpose. As such this appeal on the grounds that the learned lower Forum should not have accepted the report in this regard to dismiss the complaint.
4. In this appeal both sides rely on the report of the Surveyor dated 31.7.2007. We have heard both sides at length and went through this report minutely. The Surveyor's report has not mentioned whether the said damaged vehicle was actually surveyed by it at which location and on what date and time. It has mentioned that the vehicle has run above 18000 kms. in six months to arrive at conclusion that it was being used for commercial purposes.
5. The Counsel for the appellant could not provide us with any document to show that actually this damaged vehicle was inspected before this report was prepared. In such view of the facts we feel that the report dated 31.7.2007 accepted by the lower Forum cannot be held. The basis of the report, Inspection of damaged vehicle, is apparently missing in the Surveyor report itself.
6. Having considered the above facts we set aside the impugned order dated 2.9.2008 and remand back the case for fresh consideration by the lower forum within four months. The parties are directed to produce their supporting evidence as per rules. Accordingly this appeal is allowed without cost.
Issue free copy of this order to all concerned for needful.
