AFR / NAFR CHHATTISGARH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PANDRI, RAIPUR Date of Institution: 14/11/2023 Date of Final Hearing: 28/03/2024 Date of Pronouncement: 15/04/2024 APPEAL No.- FA/23/265 IN THE MATTER OF : 1. Divisional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Divisional Office, MB Trade Center, 2nd Floor, Ghadi Chowk, Dist. DHAMTARI (C.G.) … Appellant No.1

2. Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office: Mandi Complex, Kanker, Dist. NORTH BASTAR KANKER (C.G.) … Appellant No.2 Both through: Shri Shishir Bhandarkar, Advocate Vs.

Jitendra Kumar S/o. Shri Aghan Singh Nishad, R/o. Vill. Kirgoli, Kanker, Murdongri, P.S. & Tah. Kanker, Dist. KANKER (CG) … Respondent Through: Shri Ashu Prajapati, Advocate CORAM: -

HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAUTAM CHOURDIYA, PRESIDENT HON’BLE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR VARMA, MEMBER PRESENT: -

Shri Shishir Bhandarkar, Advocate for the appellants.

None appeared for the respondent.

JUDGEMENT

PER: - JUSTICE GAUTAM CHOURDIYA, PRESIDENT This appeal, filed under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act

2019 (hereinafter called “the Act” for short) is directed against order dated 13/09/2023 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Bastar, Kanker (C.G.) (hereinafter called the “District Commission” for short) in Complaint Case No.CC/2019/02, whereby the complaint was partly allowed and the opposite parties / appellants herein insurance company were jointly and severally directed to pay the complainant / respondent within 30 days compensation against repairing expenditure of the insured vehicle Rs.1,06,258/- (One Lac Six Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Eight) along with simple interest @ 7% p.a. from the date of filing complaint 18.01.2019 till realization, failing which the interest was directed to be paid @ 9% p.a. The opposite parties/ appellants were also directed to pay within one month compensation for mental agony Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) and cost of litigation Rs.3,000/- (Three Thousand). Regarding salvage of the insured vehicle it was directed that the complainant/ respondent shall keep the salvage. Feeling aggrieved the opposite parties have come up before us.

2. In nutshell the facts of the case are that the complainant/ respondent is the registered owner of Bolero vehicle No.CG-19-BF-4273 for which insurance cover was obtained from the opposite parties/ appellants insurance company for the period between 22.12.2017 to 21.12.2018, during which period on 15.06.2018 the said vehicle met with an accident an suffered damages. Immediate intimation was given to the opposite parties/ appellants insurance company. Surveyor was sent on the spot, who surveyed the vehicle and assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.44,000/- (Forty Four Thousand), whereas estimated loss to the vehicle was of Rs.1,69,600/- (One Lac Sixty Nine Thousand Six Hundred). Later on along with all requisite documents insurance claim of Rs.1,41,677/- (One Lac Forty One Thousand Six Hundred Seventy Seven), which was not paid hence alleging deficiency in service complaint was filed seeking relief for payment of Rs.1,41,677/- along with interest and compensation for mental agony etc.

3. The opposite parties/ appellants insurance company in their joint written version denied the allegations leveled against them. However the claim was not settled by the opposite parties/ appellants insurance company but as per their defence taken in the written version a letter was sent on 27.08.2018 through registered post to the complainant / respondent for submitting discharge voucher and cancelled cheque for the purpose of making payment of Rs.44,000/- (Forty Four Thousand) i.e. the loss assessed by the surveyor but the complainant / respondent himself stopped the insurer to make such payment.

4. Learned District Commission in the impugned order arrived at the conclusion that the opposite parties/ appellants insurance company are jointly and severally liable for payment of actual bill of repairing paid by the comp