STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION UTTARAKHAND DEHRADUN Date of Admission: 27.05.2025 Date of Final Hearing: 19.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 22.01.2026 SC/5/A/16/2024 United India Insurance Company Limited Micro Office, Tehsil Road, Bageshwar through its Assistant Manager Sh. Shrey Sharma United India Insurance Company Limited Regional Office, Ratan Palace Kaulagarh Road, Dehradun (Through: Sh. R.K. Garg, Advocate)

…… Appellant Versus

1. Sh. Lalit Prasad Arya S/o Sh. Bhupal Ram R/o Village Duni, Tehsil Kapkot District Bageshwar (Through: None)

2. Sh. Ravindra Pal Singh Tomar, Investigator Tomar Tower, Tanakpur Road, Near G.G. Fruit Factory Haldwani (Nainital)

(Through: None)

…… Respondents Coram:

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

ORDER

(Per: Ms. Kumkum Rani, President):

This appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 has been directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 19.03.2024 passed by learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bageshwar (hereinafter to be referred as “The District Commission”) in consumer complaint No. 04 of 2019, styled as Sh. Lalit Prasad Arya Vs. Micro Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited and another, wherein and whereby the consumer complaint was allowed and the appellant – insurance company to pay compensation of Rs. 2,08,000/- to respondent No. 1 / complainant together with interest @8% p.a. from 11.10.2018, i.e., the date of repudiation of the claim till payment, besides to pay Rs. 20,000/- towards mental agony and Rs. 10,000/- towards litigation expenses. It was further held that since the surveyor of the insurance company has assessed the loss on Net of Salvage Basis with R.C., hence the insurance company shall have no right over the salvage of the insured vehicle. The proceedings of the consumer complaint were dropped against respondent No. 2 / opposite party No. 2.

2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, in brief, are, as such that respondent No. 1 / complainant is the registered owner of vehicle bearing registration No. UK-02-A-0273, which was insured with the appellant – insurance company under Private Car Package Policy for the period from 13.11.2017 to 12.11.2018 at an IDV of Rs. 2,64,000/-. During the currency of the insurance policy, the insured vehicle met with an accident on 07.04.2018 at 10:00 p.m. near Khirabgarh, Nayal and fell in a 40 mts. deep ditch. The intimation of the accident was given by the complainant to the insurance company. The insurance company got the claim investigated through its investigator – respondent No. 2 / opposite party No. 2. The insurance company through letter dated 11.10.2018 repudiated the claim of the complainant on the ground that as per the investigation report, at the time of accident, the insured vehicle was being used for commercial purpose, i.e., hire and reward, in contravention of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy, hence the claim is not payable. Therefore, the consumer complaint was filed by the complainant before the District Commission.

3. The appellant – insurance company filed written statement before the District Commission and pleaded that upon receipt of intimation of accident of insured vehicle, Sh. Ravindra Pal Singh Tomar was appointed as investigator to investigate the matter. During the course of investigation, it transpired that on 07.04.2018 at 9:30 p.m., the complainant had taken the insured vehicle on booking of Rs. 500/- from Kapkot to Pothing and while returning back, the accident took place. The vehicle was registered and insured as a private vehicle, whereas at the time of accident, it was being used for commercial purpose, in violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. Thus, the claim of the complainant was rightly repudiated by the insurance company and there lies no deficiency in service on their part.

4. Inspite of sufficient service of notice, the respondent No. 2 / opposite party No. 2 neither appe