SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(NCDRC) 126

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
DIVISIONAL MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ANR. – Appellant
Versus
BATTALA SUDHAKAR BABU – Respondent
NC/RP/1553/2022



Petitioner Advocates:GAURAV NAIR ,Respondent Advocate: MR. B. SHRAVANTH SHANKER

##PAGE1##

IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

AT NEW DELHI

NC/RP/1553/2022

(Against the order dated 22.08.2022 in Appeal No. 189/2018 of the Telangana

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission)

With

NC/IA/11171/2022(Stay)

Divisional Manager,

National Insurance Company Limited & Anr. Appellant (s)

Versus

Battala Sudhakar Babu ... Respondent (s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.P. SAHI, PRESIDENT

HON'BLE MR. BHARATKUMAR PANDYA, MEMBER

For the Appellant (s) : Mr. Gaurav Nair and Mr. Geo Kennedy K., Advocates

For the Respondent (s) : Ms. Prerna Robin, Advocate

PRONOUNCED ON : 30.01.2026

ORDER

JUSTICE A.P. SAHI, PRESIDENT

1. This revision petition arises out of an order passed by the SCDRC,

Telangana, whereby the State Commission has reversed the order of

the District Commission dated 10.05.2018 in CC/51/2016. The

complaint filed by the respondent/ complainant had been dismissed by

the District Commission against which he filed appeal no. 189/2018 and

the State Commission while allowing the appeal has awarded the

RP/1553/2022 Page | 1

I

##PAGE2##

amount claimed in respect of the loss suffered by the complainant due

to the accident of his lorry bearing Registration No. AP 04 TU 9119.

2. The District Commission had dismissed the complaint without

appreciating the survey reports that came to be filed before the State

Commission in appeal. The vehicle had suffered loss on account of an

accident resulting in an electrocution due to electric wires having come

into contact as a result whereof the entire vehicle was gutted. The case

was of a total loss. The District Commission arrived at the conclusion

that the complainant had kept quiet about the extent of load being

carried by the vehicle and after relying on a couple of decisions held

that there was no deficiency in service. We may point out that the claim

had been repudiated by the Insurance Company vide repudiation letter

dated 02.12.2016, on the ground that there was another person

travelling in the said vehicle at the time of accident for which no extra

premium for carrying a gratuitous passenger had been paid. The

second ground taken was that the document relating to the load of

consignment carried by the vehicle was found to be fake on verification

of two investigators through their reports dated 29.04.2016 and

13.09.2016.

3. At this juncture, it would be appropriate to reproduce the said reports

referred to in the letter Of repudiation. The report dated 29.04.2016 is

extracted herein under:

RP/1553/2022 Page | 2

##PAGE3##

Non.

Vijs-y Kumar Gaur

IrJVEoTiGATOR Office & Residence

> * B-161, Kamla Nehru Nagor

jtaG si f ic * X aJ .."*■■ S&uUbd4d1U-2rSfeSj4) S n EXT. Near Arora Park,

JODHPUR-342 003

_______S 0291-2756548

Re£ So.- PRIVATE fc CONyiDENTSAZ.

DATE29.04.2Ci6

: iHi ft 9 y

Wk cp'rafrfri-

3.->T333^>rt :- 552400/el aiin 15-16/1568 dated 30.03.2016

WT3: wft.3{R.HcillH EOng ]

4IPrt :— eft. gyidR ' -

; ^Sel:- 1U-19/GE-2939

3ffcRft-rt>4tn:- 552400/31 /14 /630C^I|Q

sjtt Y -gst mFi K rj -i9/ge -29S9 tri Pert >.vs.

S.T.C. Cargo’s 3ft sp-iko 101 33 WJIM-i I>tY .'mi—WT B.T.C. Cargo's gRT

?f£fWe an 3jf?r^?5 f^ur, fvRnfr nraq 4 b.t .c. Cargo’s

sa ?T7cTFW, CTferp f&Rf rHTUfem Wr 3 TFW 3R -giRf TRrfiftyff 3n

SPpta fftnn. vft B.T.C. Cargo’s tte A vYsiR. srHTOT 101 J5T

3R 3c1iqi fftl sfiKI Sfr.STR. Kpfifr vtT^ H nTfilft xjnf

W3 RJ-19/GE-2989 3 W vHx> IftniT ■’TC: t

3-Rlfn ftRcT OT ft?T nft Irft.OT?. 101 g £ |

' 3T=tt^s fitHT fftRft V«f fftHT vTTTO OjfeRft

aiRREnp jriddifl 5Rga fW w 11. ' ~ "

(fdMiii tgHfJnYg )

fate

gHf |

•J

4. Translation of the same has also been filed stating that on verification

M/s. BTC Cargo have informed that the concerned good receipts as

relied on by the complainant had not been issued by them.

5. The second investigator appointed by the Insurance Company, namely,

M/s. Pearl Insutech Private Limited tendered a report on 13.09.2016.

RP/1553/2022 Page | 3

##PAGE4##

This investigator was engaged to carry out an LR verification in respect

of a document issued by M/s. Mama Roadlines. They could not get any

informati

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top