Back
MADHYA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
S.K. Kulshreshtha, President, Pramila S. Kumar and Neerja Singh, Members
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. - Appellant
Versus
ALKA - Respondent
Appeal No. 1662 of 2007
Decided on : 06-08-2010
Mr. Deepesh Shukla, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. V.K. Saxena, Advocate, for the Respondent
The Court relied on the Surveyor's assessment and found no evidence to support the Insurance Company's contention, leading to the partial allowance of the appeal.
Headnote:
Insurance - Vehicle Insurance - Repair Claim
Fact of the Case:
The respondent's insured vehicle met with an accident, and the Insurance Company repudiated the claim on the ground that the vehicle was being used commercially, which was a violation of the terms of the policy. The Forum found no evidence to support the appellant's contention and awarded the repair amount claimed by the respondent, which was higher than the Surveyor's assessment.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that there was no evidence to support the appellant's contention regarding the commercial usage of the vehicle. However, it held that the Forum erred in awarding the higher repair amount without specifying any reason and concluded that the net liability assessed by the Surveyor was correct.
Issues: Dispute over the usage of the insured vehicle and the assessment of repair amount
Ratio Decidendi: The Court relied on the Surveyor's assessment of the repair amount and found no evidence to support the appellant's contention regarding the commercial usage of the vehicle.
Final Decision: The appeal was partly allowed, and the Insurance Company was liable to pay the respondent a sum of Rs. 1,21,000 for the repair of the vehicle.
ORDER
Mrs. Neerja Singh, Member - This appeal is by the opposite party, the National Insurance Co. Ltd. aggrieved by the order dated 4.5.2007, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ratlam, directing them to pay Rs. 1,79,508, towards repair of the vehicle, and costs of Rs. 500.
2. The facts in brief are that the respondent's vehicle, a Tempo Trax, which was insured with the appellant Insurance Company, met with an accident on 22.3.2004. The respondent states that she spent Rs. 1,90,962 on the repair of the vehicle by the authorized dealer. The Surveyor assessed the net liability at Rs. 1,21,000. However, the Insurance Company repudiated the claim on the ground that the vehicle was being used commercially, which was a violation of the terms of the policy.
3. The Forum below, after duly considering the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that there was nothing to support the appellant's contention that the vehicle was being used commercially. Even otherwise, the appellant themselves have filed the report of Mr. K.M. Thombre, Surveyor, who was asked to do a fact finding of the claim. In his report, he concludes "there is no authentic proof/statement of the passengers of insured vehicle that the insured vehicle was on hire basis at the time of the accident". We, therefore, see no reason to differ with the finding of the Forum, as regards the usage of the vehicle.
4. However, the Forum has erred in awarding the sum of Rs. 1,79,508 towards the repairs of the vehicle, on the basis of the bills filed on record. Awarding the total amount claimed by the respondent and ignoring the Surveyor's report without specifying any reason, is incorrect. The Surveyor, Pankaj Gahoi, has assessed the total loss at Rs. 1,30,467. After deducting the salvage and compulsory excess, the net liability is Rs. 1,21,000. We see no reason to doubt the correctness of the assessment as made by the Surveyor.
5. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The appellant are liable to pay to the respondent a sum of Rs. 1,21,000. In pursuance of our directions, dated 29.8.2007, the appellant has already deposited Rs. 1,21,000 with the District Forum. The same is permitted to be withdrawn by the respondent. No order as to costs.
