STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION UTTARAKHAND DEHRADUN FIRST APPEAL NO. 130 / 2018 HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited having Regional Office at Stellar I.T. Park, Sector-62 Noida, U.P. through Manager (Legal)

…… Appellant / Opposite Party Versus Sh. Jagat Ram Dobhal S/o Sh. Dharam Dutt Dobhal R/o Village Kunna, Tehsil Chakrata District Dehradun …… Respondent / Complainant Sh. Sudhanshu Dwivedi, Learned Counsel for the Appellant Sh. S.L. Thapliyal, Learned Counsel for Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice D.S. Tripathi, President Mr. Udai Singh Tolia, Member-II Dated: 16/08/2022

ORDER

(Per: Justice D.S. Tripathi, President):

This appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 28.07.2018 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Dehradun (in short “The District Commission”) in consumer complaint No. 182 of 2015; Sh. Jagat Ram Dobhal Vs HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited, by which the consumer complaint was allowed and the appellant – opposite party was directed to pay compensation of Rs. 2,07,289/- to the respondent – complainant together with towing charges of Rs. 35,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs. 5,000/-, within a period of 30 days’, failing which the complainant was further held entitled to interest @9% p.a. on the aforesaid amount from the date of institution of the consumer complaint till payment.

2. Facts giving rise to this appeal, in brief, are that according to the consumer complaint, the respondent – complainant is the registered owner of 3-DX JCB machine (Excavator) bearing registration No. UK16-CA-0209, which was insured with the appellant – opposite party for the period from 28.02.2015 to 27.02.2016 at an IDV of Rs. 20,90,000/-. During the currency of the insurance policy, on 12.05.2015, while the JCB machine was being used for construction of road at a place near Goraghati on Goraghati Rangau Motor Road, all of a sudden, retaining wall collapsed and the insured vehicle fell in the gorge. Intimation of the accident was given by the villagers to the Revenue Inspector, who visited the spot and submitted report that the vehicle had fallen into 60 feet deep gorge and there has not been loss of any human life. The intimation of the accident was telephonically given to the insurance company. The official of the insurance company told the complainant to bring the vehicle to service station by towing it from the accident site, where the surveyor will assess the loss and submit the estimate of repairs with the insurance company. The complainant submitted an estimate of repairs to the tune of Rs. 2,90,194.50/- with the insurance company. Thereafter, the complainant submitted copy of driving licence of the driver of the vehicle. The complainant requested the insurance company on several occasions for payment of the claim amount, but all in vain. The complainant also suffered a loss of more than Rs. 50,000/-, on account of the vehicle being parked in the workshop. The complainant sent a legal notice dated 12.05.2015 through his counsel to the insurance company and thereafter, filed the consumer complaint before the District Commission.

3. The appellant – insurance company filed written statement before the District Commission, wherein it was pleaded that upon receipt of intimation of accident of insured vehicle, the insurance company appointed Sh. Anoop Puri, Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessor, to assess the loss. The said surveyor submitted his report dated 05.07.2015 to the insurance company, thereby assessing the loss at sum of Rs. 55,235/-, subject to terms and conditions of the insurance policy. Upon verification of driving licence of Sh. Amit Singh, it was found that he was authorised to drive LMV (NT); LMV-GV(TR) and LMV CAB (TR), but the same was invalid for driving JCB excavator, unladen weight whereof is 7460 kgs. and laden weight is 7460 kgs. Hence, the complainant – insured has violated t