STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION MADHYA PRADESH FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/23/A/20/692 NEW INDIA ASSU.CO.LTD.

PRESENT ADDRESS - THRO BR. MANAGER, BR. OFF. DAMOH, DIST. DAMOH 470 661 ,MADHYA PRADESH.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus PREM NARAYAN NAYAK PRESENT ADDRESS - R/O LUHARI TEH. PATERA DIST. DAMOH. 470772 ,MADHYA PRADESH.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. DR.SRIKANTH PANDEY , PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MRS. DR. MONIKA MALIK , MEMBER FOR THE APPELLANT:

NEW INDIA ASSU.CO.LTD.

FOR THE RESPONDENT: PREM NARAYAN NAYAK DATED: 07/05/2025

ORDER

M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL FIRST APPEAL NO. 692 OF 2020 (Arising out of order dated 03.07.2020 passed in C.C.No.111/2019 by District Commission, Damoh)

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.

THROUGH BRANCH MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE DAMOH (M.P.). … APPELLANT.

Versus PREM NARAYAN NAYAK, S/O SHRI BABULAL NAYAK R/O LUHARI, TEHSIL-PATERA DISTRICT-DAMOH (M.P.) ... RESPONDENT.

BEFORE :

HON’BLE DR. SRIKANT PANDEY : PRESIDING MEMBER HON’BLE DR. MONIKA MALIK : MEMBER COUNSEL FOR PARTIES :

Shri Mahavir Bhatnagar, learned counsel for the appellant.

None for the respondent.

O R D E R

(Passed On 07.05.2025)

The following order of the Commission was delivered by Dr.

Monika Malik, Member:

This appeal by the opposite party/appellant-New India Assurance Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘insurance company’) is directed against the order dated 03.07.2020 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Damoh (for short the ‘District Commission’) in C. C. No. 111/2019 whereby the complaint filed by the complainant/respondent has been partly allowed.

2. Briefly put, facts of the case as narrated by the complainant are that his vehicle-Bolero bearing registration number MP-34 T-0796 was insured with the opposite party-insurance company for the period w.e.f. 07.08.2018 to 06.08.2019. On 28.10.2018 near Angeethi Dhaba situated at Damoh Hata Marg the subject vehicle met with an accident in an attempt to save a cow and got damaged of which intimation was given to the insurance company. The insurance company appointed surveyor in the matter. The complainant incurred Rs.1,50,000/- in repairs of the subject vehicle and submitted the claim with the insurance company with requisite documents. The claim filed with the insurance company was allowed to the extent of Rs.23,000/-. The complainant therefore, alleging deficiency in service on part of opposite party-insurance company, filed complaint before the District Commission, seeking relief.

3. The opposite party-insurance company resisted the complaint and submitted in its reply that an 'All India Permit' was produced however, there was not authorization from the State on the date of accident. Even then the insurance company on the basis of the amount assessed by the Surveyor on non-standard and after deduction of excess clause and salvage value paid a sum of Rs.23,110/-

to the complainant. It was prayed that the complaint be dismissed with costs.

4. The District Commission partly allowed the complaint and directed the insurance company to pay Rs.1,13,900/- with interest @ 6%

-3-

p.a. from 25.04.2019, till payment to the complainant within a period of one month.

Compensation of Rs.2,000/- with costs of Rs.2,000/- is also awarded.

5. Heard. Perused the record.

6. Learned counsel for the opposite party/appellant-insurance company argued that the order passed by the District Commission is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble National Commission and Hon'ble Supreme Court. He argued that the District Commission has acted with material irregularity in not going to the basis of settlement of claim which was as per documentary evidence on record. He therefore prayed for setting aside the impugned order. He placed reliance on a decision of Hon'ble National Commission in Tarun Parekh Vs Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited decided on 24 May 2022. in support of his contentions.

7. As per the insurance company, the Dist