STATE CONSU MER ^{DISPUTESREDRESSALCOMMISSION,ODISHA,CUTTACK} FIRST APPEAL NO.236 ^{OF 2013} (From an order dated 30.05.2013 passed by ^{the District Consumer} Disputes Redressal Forum, ^{Bolangir in CC No. 59 of 2012)}

1. The Oriental lnsurance ^{Co Ltd.,} Divisional office, V.S.S.Marg, ^Sambalpur Represented through ^{its senior Divisional Manager}

2. The Oriental lnsurance ^{Co Ltd.,} Botangir Branch, AUPo/Ps/Dist - ^Bolangir, Represented through ^{its Branch Manager}

3. The Oriental lnsurance ^{Co Ltd.,} Head Office, Oriental ^{House, A-25127, Asaf Ali Road,} New Delhi Appellants Vrs.

Muralidhar Khamari, ^{aged about 66 years,} Son of Late Biswswear Khamari, resident of Village and ^Po - ^Manda!, Ps - Patnagarh, ^Dist - ^Bolangir ... Respondent For the appetlants ^{: M/s G.P.Dutta& Associates} For the respondent: ^{M/s M.K.Das& Associates} PRESENT:

oFFlclATlNG PRESIDENT, HoN,BLE MR.D.K.MoHAPATRA, AND MISS S.L.PATTNAIK, ^MEMBER -

N/,,, DATED THE 13th DECEMBER, 2023 ORDER MR D.K.MOHAPATRA. OFFICIATING PRESIDENT Heard learned counsel for ^{both parties.}

2. This appeal has been ^{filed challenging the order dated} 03.05.2013 passed by the ^{learned District Commission, Bolangir in} C.D.Case No. 59 ot2012.

3. The case of the complainant is that the complainant has insured his vehicle ^{TATA make Winger 13 Stn BS-ll purchased from} Laxmi Sales and Services Pvt.Ltd., Bargarh bearing ^Registration No. OR-O3E-7246 ^{with the Oriental lnsurance Company Ltd for the} period from 28.1.2011 lo 27.1.2012. ^{During the subsistence of the} insurance policy on ^{8.1.2012 morning, the vehicle met with an accident} and suffered extensive damage. ^{The accident was} reported ^{to the police and subsequently to the concerned insurance} The claim ^{aPPlication bearing No'}

company.

was lodged before the op. Accordingly, 345600/g1t?o12lo3oo7o ^the OP insurance company deputed surveyor ^{to assess the loss} and on the advice ^{of the surveyor the vehicle was shifted to the} service centre ^{at Laxmi Sales and Services Pvt' Ltd', Bargarh' After} repairing the ^{complainant submitted repairing bills for Rs'1} '79'7371- but ^the surveyor ^{assessed the net loss at Rs'44,800/-' Therefore' the} complainant ^{filed the complaint petition atleging deficiency in} service on the ^{part of} the OP in ^{not settling the claim of the} complainant as ^per the details ^{submitted by him.}

4.

On receipt of notice, OPs entered appearance and field written version denying ^the allegations ^{made in the complaint} petition and stating that ^the surveyor has assessed ^{the net loss} after inspecting the vehicle at ^{Rs.44,800/- and also has filed the} copy of the surveyor's report. According ^{to the insurance company} the discharge voucher was ^{prepared for Rs.44,300/- but the} complaint did not agree to ^{the said amount.}

5. After hearing the ^{parties, learned District Commission passed the} impugned order directing ^{the OPs to pay a sum of Rs.1,34,8031-} to ^the complainant within thirty days ^{of the order failing which the} p$

amount woutd carry ^{interest at the rate of 9o/o annum besides} payment of Rs. 5,000/- towards compensation ^{for harassment and} mental agony and ^{Rs.2,000/- towards Iitigation expenses.}

6. Chaltenging ^{the said impugned order, the appellants have} filed the ^{present aPPea!.}

7. During course ^{of hearing, learned counsel for the appellants} submitted that they ^{have not committed any deficiency in service as} because on ^{receipt of claim form from the complainant, they} deputed ^{the surveyor} and after repairing of the vehicle ^{the surveyor} has furnished ^{the report assessing the net loss at Rs.44,800/-'}

Further, learned counsel ^{for the appellants submitted that the} learned District Commission ^{while disposing the matter has relied} upon ^the decision ^{of the Hon',ble National commission in the case} of Priya lndustries ^{v. National lnsurance co.Ltd 2012(21 cPR} 152 NG holding ^{that "Report submitted by the surveyor is an} important piece of evidence but same ^{is not sacrosanct and can be} displaced by ^{leading cogent evidence." Learned District} commission ^{further relying upon the said judgment has held that in} t