NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
R.K. Agrawal, President and Dr. S.M. Kantikar, Member
Ravish Singh – Appellant
versus
IFFCO Tokio G.I.C. Ltd. and Anr. – Respondents
First Appeal No.354 of 2020
(Against the Order dated 29/01/2020 in Complaint No.429/2018 of the State Commission Haryana)
Decided on 9.8.2021

IMPORTANT POINT
National Commission also held that liability of the Respondent Insurance Co. would be Insured Declared Value which is Rs.29,31,140/- less Salvage Value.

Headnote:

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 15 (Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Sec. 41) – First Appeals – Against the Order dt. 29.01.2020 in Appeal of the State Commission by Respondent - Appeal also filed by Petitioner u/s 19 (Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Sec. 24) - Not in dispute that insured vehicle (bought second hand by the Petitioner) met with accident when Insurance Policy was in force - Respondent Insurance Co. was ready to replace damaged vehicle with vehicle of same Make and Model available with CARTRADE Website as manufacturer discontinued production and sale of BMW X5 SUV vehicle – Appellant did not give his consent for purchase of said vehicle from CARTRADE website, instead insisted upon payment of Rs.87,79,662/- being On-Road price of BMW X5 SUV Vehicle – State Commission directed Respondent to pay sum of Rs.29,31,140/- to Appellant – Vehicle had been declared by Surveyor as non-repairable - This Commission also held that liability of the Respondent Insurance Co. would be Insured Declared Value which is Rs.29,31,140/- less Salvage Value.

Held: From the record, we find that it is not in dispute that the BMW X5 SUV, i.e., the Insured Vehicle met with an accident on 06.11.2017 when the Insurance Policy was in force. The Surveyor appointed by the Opposite Party Insurance Company reported that the Vehicle was non-repairable and it was a case of Total Loss. He, however, assessed the net liability of the Opposite Party Insurance Company at Rs.21,98,000/- by taking Rs.23,00,000/- as market value of the Insured Vehicle and deducting a sum of Rs.1 lakh being the Salvage Value without documents and Policy Excess of Rs.2,000/-.The loss assessed by the Surveyor had been accepted by the Opposite Party Insurance Company. The Opposite Party Insurance Company was prepared to replace the damaged Vehicle with the Vehicle of the same Make and Model available with CARTRADE Website as the Manufacturer discontinued the production and sale of the BMW X5 SUV vehicle. The Complainant, however, did not give his consent for purchase of the Vehicle of the same Make and Model from CARTRADE and instead insisted upon payment of Rs.87,79,662/- being the On Road price of BMW X5 SUV Vehicle. The State Commission after considering the entire material on record as also the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the Parties directed the Opposite Party Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs.29,31,140/- being the IDV of the Insured Vehicle less Salvage of Rs.1 lakh and Rs.2,000/- towards Excess Clause. Admittedly, under the Depreciation Waiver Clause of the Insurance Policy, benefits of Depreciation Waiver had to be provided if the replacement of parts is considered necessary otherwise benefits of Depreciation is not to be considered. Under the New Vehicle Replacement Clause, the Opposite Party Insurance Company is liable to pay the actual amount difference between the IDV, i.e., Insured Declared Value of the Vehicle and the current Ex-showroom price of New Vehicle of same Make, Model, features and specifications if the Vehicle becomes total loss. If the Insured Vehicle is available for sale as New Vehicle in India and is not out of production, otherwise for such vehicle which is not available, the Claim has to be settled as per Total Loss Claim settlement of Standard Motor Package Policy. If the Insured Vehicle goes out of production after commencement of Insurance, then the difference between last available Ex-Showroom price of the Insured Vehicle and IDV, i.e., Insured Declared Value has to be paid.

As the Vehicle, in question, had been declared by the Surveyor as non-repairable and a case of Total Loss and the Complainant had taken the Policy with Add on Covers of New Vehicle Replacement and Depreciation Waiver Cover, the Complainant is entitled for payment of amount to be determined under the Clauses of New Vehicle Replacement and Depreciation Waiver contained in the Insurance Policy.

From perusal of the conditions of Depreciation Waiver and New Vehicle Replacement, we are of the considered opinion that as it had been assessed as a case of Total Loss and no parts can be replaced, Depreciation Waiver clause is not attracted. Further, the Manufacturer has discontinued the production and sale of Vehicle BMW X5 SUV, i.e. the Make and Model of the Insured Vehicle, thus, the Opposite Party Insurance Company is liable to pay the value as per New Vehicle Replacement Clause of the Insurance Policy. The last available Ex-showroom Price of the Vehicle has neither been stated by the Manufacturer nor by the Opposite Party Insurance Company. However, it is being claimed by the Complainant as per the quotation of Bird Automotive, Gurugram. The price given by Bird Automotive, Gurugram has not been proved, in the absence of which the difference between the price quoted by Bird Automotive and the Insured Declared Value cannot be applied in the present case. Thus, the liability, if any, of the Opposite Party Insurance Company would be the Insured Declared Value which in the present case is Rs.29,31,140/- less the Salvage Value which has been assessed at Rs.1,00,000/- and Policy Excess of Rs.2,000/-, which the State Commission while disposing off the Complaint has rightly ordered. (Paras 10, 11 & 12)

Result: Appeals dismissed.