I!

UN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW DELHI RESERVED OLKNJ I:H 0G3F.1E0D.2C0B2A PRONOUNCED ON : .04.12.2025 SECOND APPEAL NO. 423 OF 2025 (From the order dated 25.04.2025 in Appeal No. 708/2024 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Chhattisgarh )

With IA / 8829-30 of 2025 ( exemption to file typed copies of documents, summon record)

Dayaram Agrawal Appellant (s)

Madhuban, Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel Ward Behind Gujarati Colony Ward No.5, District Dhamtari, Chattisgarh Versus The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Respondent(s)

Through Divisional Manager II Floor, LIC Campus, Investment Building Phase-1 Jeevan Bima Marg, Pandri, Raipur, Chattisgarh BEFORE:

HON'BLE DR. INDER JIT SINGH, PRESIDING MEMBER HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN, MEMBER For the Appellant(s) Ms. Panchajanya Batra Singh, Advocate.

Ms. Mamta, Advocate Mr Himalya Singh, Advocate For the Respondent Mr. J P Sheokand, Advocate

ORDER

DR.INDER JIT SINGH, PRESIDING MEMBER The present Second Appeal (SA) has been filed by the Appellant against Respondent as detailed above, under section 51 (2) of Consumer Protection Act 2019, against the order dated 25.04.2025 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Chhattisgarh (hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Commission’), in First Appeal (FA) No. 708 of 2024 in which order dated 07.10.2024 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Dhamtari (hereinafter referred to as District Commission) in Consumer Complaint (CC) no 24 of 2013 was challenged, inter alia praying for setting aside the order dated 25.04.2025 of the State Commission.

2. While the Appellant (hereinafter also referred to as Complainant) was Respondent before the State Commission and Complainant before the District Commission, the Respondent herein was Appellant before the State Commission and Opposite Party before the District Commission.

3. Notice was issued to the Respondent(s) on 29.07.2025. Parties filed Written Arguments/Synopsis on 24.09.2025 ( Appellant) and 22.09.2025 (respondent) respectively.

4. Brief facts of the case as presented by the Complainant and as emerged from the SA, Order of the State Commission, Order of the District Commission and other case records are that Appellant/complainant is the registered owner of vehicle No. CG 05 AN 7834, insured with the respondent under Private Car Package Policy Add On Cover, valid from 03.02.2023 to 03.02.2024. On 22.08.2023, while driving near National Highway No. 30, Raipur-Abhanpur (Parasatti), Police Station Abhanpur, District Raipur (C.G.), two two-wheelers — Activa No. CG 04 NY 1416 (with two women and one man) and motorcycle No. CG 04 NY 1372 (with one man and one woman) —

SA/423/2025 were moving parallelly and conversing with each other. During this, both two- wheelers collided. In an attempt to avoid the collision, the driver of the complainant’s car moved the vehicle toward the divider, causing it to hit the divider. Subsequently, the rider of motorcycle No. CG 04 NY 1372, due to his own negligence, collided with the car, resulting in the accident. After the accident on 22.08.2023, the complainant immediately informed the agent of the opposite party, following which a claim was registered for the vehicle damage. The surveyor appointed by the opposite party inspected the accident site, took photographs, and assessed the loss as a total loss with an IDV of ?9,92,750 and registration expenses of ,07,577. All necessary documents — RO book, driving license, and insurance certificate — were submitted by the complainant. As instructed by the insurance company, the damaged vehicle was taken to the Maruti showroom for repairs. However, on 27.02.2024, the insurer rejected the claim, alleging that the car driver was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident. When the complainant went to the Police Station Aabhanpur and investigated the matter, the complainant was told that a charge sheet under Sections 279, 337, 338, and 304A IRC had been filed aga