ADDITIONAL BENCH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

First Appeal No.100 of 2023 Date of institution : 16.02.2023 Reserved on : 09.07.2023 Date of decision : 17.07.2024

1. Kotak Mahindra General Insurance Company Limited, H-78, 7^th

23 Himalaya House, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi-110001.

2. Kotak Mahindra General Insurance Company Ltd., Jawaharke, Tehsil and District Mansa, both through its authorized signatory Mr. Milind V Myakal, Senior Vice President, available at 8^th floor, Kotak Infinity IT Park, General A K Vaidya Marg, Malad-East, Mumbai, Maharashtra-400097.

…..Appellants/Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 Versus

1. Surjeet Khan aged about 23 years S/o Sh. Gani Mohammad, Resident of VPO Dalel Singh Wala, Tehsil and District Mansa (Punjab).

….Respondent No.1/complainant

2. Rajpul Surveyor, Rajpoul Singh, DM & EE, Near Tinkoni, Namdev Marg, G.T.Road, Bathinda, through its Managing Manager ….Respondent No.2/Opposite party No.3 .

First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 03.01.2023 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mansa in cc/40/2021 Quorum:-

Mr. H.P.S. Mahal, Presiding Judicial Member Mrs. Kiran Sibal, Member Argued by:-

For the appellants : Sh. Sanjeev Goyal, Advocate For respondents : Exparte KIRAN SIBAL, MEMBER The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants/opposite parties No.1 & 2 against the impugned order dated 03.01.2023 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mansa (in short, “the District Commission”), whereby the complaint filed by complainant against opposite parties (in short ‘OPs’), under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, was partly accepted and the following relief has been granted:

“Resultantly, in view of the above, the present complaint is partly allowed and OP Nos. 1 & 2, jointly and severally are directed to pay the insurance claim amount as assessed by the Surveyor i.e. Rs.13,800/- to the complainant along with Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs.5000/- as litigation expenses. Complaint is dismissed against OP No.3 ”

2. It would be apposite to mention that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as have been arrayed before the District Commission.

3. Brief facts for the disposal of the appeal are that the complainant got insured his vehicle i.e. ‘Eicher Tractor’ bearing registration No.PB31U-9076, from OPs No.1 & 2, vide policy/certificate No.1053753700 for a period from 23.01.2019 to 22.01.2020. Unfortunately, the vehicle in question met with an accident within the insured period and some of the parts of the vehicle were damaged. The complainant informed OP No.1 and ultimately, OP No.3 was appointed as Surveyor, who inspected the damaged accidental vehicle and on his instructions, the complainant got repaired his vehicle and incurred expenses to the tune of Rs.24,561/- for purchasing new parts of the damaged vehicle. Thereafter, the complainant submitted his claim, vide claim No.10510001230 in the month of November, 2019 with OPs No.1 & 2 through OP No.3 but the claim has not been cleared by the OPs till date. The complainant also served legal notice dated 17.03.2020 upon the OPs but all in vain. Alleging deficiency in service, the complainant filed the complaint before District Commission and sought directions against the OPs to pay the total sum of Rs.24,561/- for purchasing new parts of the insured vehicle and further to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony and Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses.

4. Upon notice, OPs No.1 & 2 appeared through counsel and filed joint written reply, and contested the complaint by raising certain preliminary objections, which are not required to be reproduced here for the sake of brevity. On merits, OPs No.1 & 2 stated that after getting the information on 13.11.2019 regarding loss caused to the insured vehicle, they appointed Mr. Rajpal Singh, IRDA approved Surveyor & Loss Assessor, who inspected the damaged vehicle