STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION UTTARAKHAND DEHRADUN Date of Admission: 11.10.2022 Date of Final Hearing: 05.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 26.05.2025 SC/5/A/205/2022 Smt. Saroj Seth W/o late Sanjay Set R/o House No. 700, Tankiwali Gali Arya Nagar, Jwalapur District Haridwar (Through: Sh. Deepak Ahluwalia, Advocate)

…… Appellant Versus

1. Manager (Claims)

HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited Ranipur More, Haridwar

2. Assistant Vice President (Claims)

HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited Office No. 306, 3^rd Floor, Pearl Best Heights Netaji Subhash Palace, Pitampura New Delhi – 110034 (Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 Through: Sh. Rahul Gupta, Advocate)

3. T&T Motors

212, Okhla, Phase – 3 New Delhi (Through: None)

…… Respondents Coram:

Ms. Kumkum Rani, President Mr. B.S. Manral, Member

ORDER

(Per: Ms. Kumkum Rani, President):

This appeal has been directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 29.08.2022 passed by learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haridwar (hereinafter to be referred as “The District Commission”) in consumer complaint No. 349 of 2021, styled as Smt. Saroj Seth Vs. Manager (Claims), HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited and others, wherein and whereby the consumer complaint filed by the appellant / complainant was dismissed. 2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, in brief, are, as such that the appellant / complainant obtained a loan of Rs. 31,00,000/- from Axis Bank Limited, Haridwar for firm – Seth Medi Pharma Pvt. Ltd. for the purchase of Mercedes-Benz. The total cost of the aforesaid vehicle was Rs. 65,00,000/- and after adding Rs. 34,00,000/- from her own, the complainant had purchased the vehicle from opposite party No. 3 / respondent No. 3. After purchasing the aforesaid vehicle, the complainant got the same registered with A.R.T.O., Haridwar on 18.11.2011, who had issued the registration certificate of the vehicle and the vehicle was allotted registration No. UK-08-V-0700 and the vehicle was being used by the complainant. The complainant had got the aforesaid vehicle comprehensively insured with the opposite party No. 1 / respondent No. 1 for the period from 23.01.2013 to 22.01.2014 vide policy No. 2311200415793200000, after paying the requisite premium. The vehicle was got insured under Zero Depreciation (Zero Depth Policy). At the time of obtaining the insurance policy, the opposite party Nos. 1 & 2 had told the complainant that in case the vehicle is damaged due to drowning in water, the entire claim would be paid. On dated 15.06.2013, the complainant was going from her residence at Arya Nagar, Jwalapur to the factory at SIDCUL, Haridwar and as soon as she reached Bhagat Singh Chowk ahead of Ranipur More, heavy rain started, on account whereof, the vehicle got stuck in water and inspite of several efforts, the vehicle did not start and water got filled inside the vehicle. The intimation was immediately given to opposite party No. 1, who deputed surveyor at the spot. The surveyor advised the complainant to tow the vehicle to T&T Motors Limited, New Delhi for repairs, assuring the complainant that the repair cost of the vehicle would be borne by the insurance company. Believing on the version of the surveyor, the vehicle was towed to T&T Motors Limited, New Delhi, who after opening the vehicle, gave an estimate of repairs to the tune of Rs. 74,45,257/-. The said estimate was submitted with the opposite party No. 1, who told that the insurance company can not pay such a huge amount. Thereafter, the complainant informed the financier – Axis Bank Limited, who stated that they can not do anything in the matter. The complainant requested the insurance company several times for settlement of the claim, but to no avail. On dated 19.07.2013, the complainant received a letter, wherein it was stated, “Please note the liability of the insurer is restricted upto cleaning, opening & refitting of parts and if water has entered the engine then flushing of the same. Acc