[2026:RJ-JP:338]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20076/2025

1. HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited, Registered And Corporate Office 1ct Floor, HDFC House, 165/166 Backbay Reclamation, H.T. Parekh Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai- 400020.

2. HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited, 2nd Floor, GT Gallariaya, Ahinsa Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur-

302001 Through Authorize Signatory.

3. HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office, 1st Floor, Baba Thakurdas Nagali Circle, Alwar-

301001 All Through Their Constituted Attorney.

----Petitioners Versus Mohamad Jafar Son Of Shri Ismile Khan, Aged About 34 Years, Resident Of Ballabora, Rath Nagar, Alwar.

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prakhar Agrawal with Ms. Anjali Assat for Mr. Virendra Agrawal For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA

Order

07/01/2026

1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, challenging the order dated 15.10.2025 passed by the learned Permanent Lok Adalat, Alwar in Original Application No. 51/2024 titled as 'Mohamad Jafar Vs. HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.' whereby the complaint filed by the respondent has been allowed and the petitioners have been directed to pay a sum of Rs.15,15,483/- along with interest @ 6% per annum, within a period of one month from the date of impugned order.

2. Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the respondent/applicant - Mohamad Jafar (hereinafter referred to as the 'insured') purchased a "Private Car Comprehensive Policy" bearing No. 2302205781254200000 for the period from 17.10.2023 to 16.10.2024 with an Insured Declared Value (IDV) of Rs.15,55,483/-. Such policy was purchased by the insured for his 'KIA Seltos D1.5 6MT HTX plus' bearing registration No.UP-35-

BD-2121 (hereinafter referred to as the 'insured vehicle').

3. On the intervening night of 09.02.2024 and 10.02.2024 at about 1 AM near Bandiqui-Kolana Jai, the insured vehicle got collided with the rare of a truck and resultantly, got completely damaged. A written complaint/report regarding the same was filed at Police S Baswa, District Dausa (Rajasthan) and intimation of the same has been given to the insurance company about the same, upon which a claim under the insurance policy came to be registered as claim No.C230023518207. On the said claim, an independent surveyor, i.e., Mr. Rajendra Singh, submitted a survey report. Thereafter, the Insurance Company confirmed that the insured vehicle was damaged beyond repair, and offered Rs.8,68,968/- only and alternatively offered a second-hand vehicle of model 2021 as per condition No.3 of the terms of the policy, which was not accepted by the insured.

4. Consequently, the insured approached the learned Permanent Lok Adalat, Alwar by way of Original Application No. 51/2024, citing deficiency of service and unfair trade practice adopted by the petitioner-Insurance Company.

5. The petitioner-Insurance Company filed its reply to the application and vehemently opposed the submissions advanced by the insured and that there was neither any deficiency of service nor any unfair trade practice adopted by the petitioner-Insurance Company.

6. The learned Permanent Lok Adalat, after considering the facts of the case, directed the petitioners to pay the respondent a sum of Rs.15,15,483/- along with interest @ 6% per annum, holding that the respondent cannot be compelled to take a second-hand vehicle, and that the IDV should be paid to the insured in view of the fact that the insured vehicle had been damaged beyond repair and it was a fit case of Total Loss.

7. Aggrieved by which, the petitioners have preferred the present writ petition.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned Permanent Lok Adalat has erred in awarding Rs.15,15,483/- because the surveyor Mr. Rajendra Singh has submitted a report for a loss of Rs.8,68,968/- only and alternatively offered a second hand vehicle of model 2021 as per condi