The assessment of damages in insurance claims must provide clear reasoning, and failure to do so invalidates reliance on a surveyor's findings.

1. The present Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioners against order dated 15.3.2013 of the Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ahmedabad (for short "the State Commission") in First Appeal No. 1364/2009 whereby Appeal filed by the Respondent was allowed.

2. The case of the Complainant / Respondent is that he purchased Eicher vehicle from V.G. Automobiles, bearing Registration No. GJ 6 X 8858, Engine No. 20575898, Chasis No. 205013100, for an amount of Rs.5,55,000. Vehicle was insured with the Petitioner / Opposite Party from 22.5.2002 to 21.5.2003, vide Policy No. 18100/02209/2002 dated 22.5.2002, for a sum of Rs.6,78,000. The vehicle met with an accident on 3.7.2002 at Bhilwara Road near Jharwala Village, and got badly damaged. The Complainant had consulted V.G. Automobiles, who had given an estimate of Rs.5,55,000. On the basis of the said estimate, Complainant filed Insurance Claim with the Petitioner on 19.7.2002, claiming an amount of Rs.5,55,000. Petitioner / Opposite Party got the vehicle inspected and informed the Complainant that as per the Survey Report, labour charges for repair would be Rs.21,700 along with Rs.1,61,611 towards replacement cost of parts with Rs.11,500 deduction for salvage. Claiming deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party, the Complaint filed Complaint before the District Forum with the following prayer:
(1) The Hon'ble Forum may grant the following reliefs in favour of the Complainant:
1. The amount of Rs.5,55,000 being the damages caused to the vehicle business may be awarded with interest @ 18% per annum till the realization of claim amount.
2. Rs.1,00,000 may be awarded for mental torture and agony.
3. The expenses of the complaint may be awarded."

3. The Complaint was contested by the Petitioner / Opposite Party by filing written statement. It was stated that that the Complaint was not maintainable. On merit, Opposite Party appointed a Surveyor and as per the Survey Report, the damaged vehicle was to be repaired requiring Rs.21,700 for labour charges and Rs.1,61,611 towards replacement of parts. As per the claim manual, when the damage to the vehicle is 75% or more, the claim can be considered on total loss basis.

4. The District Forum after hearing the learned Counsel for the Parties and perusing the record, allowed the Complaint in part and directed the Petitioner / Opposite Party as follows:
"The complaint is partly allowed. The opponents are directed to pay Rs.5,44,912.00 (Rupees five lacs forty four thousand nine hundred twelve only) with 9% interest, from 23.8.2002, i.e. the date of report of Shri Mahendra R. Patel the opponent's surveyor since the claim has not been repudiated till realization. The opponents are further directed to pay Rs.3,000.00 (Rupees three thousand only) for mental agony and inconvenience and another sum of Rs.1,500.00 (Rupees one thousand five hundred only) towards the cost of this proceedings. This award be complied with within one month from the d ate of receipt of copy hereof. On payment of the money awarded, the Complainant shall give the vehicle to the Opponent."

5. Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, Petitioner / Opposite Party filed an Appeal before the State Commission. State Commission allowed the Appeal and set aside the order passed by the District Forum and granted compensation of Rs.1,61,611 with 9% interest till realization. Further Rs.3,000 for mental agony and inconvenience and Rs.1,500 towards cost of other expenses was also given. Against this order of the State Commission, the Pet