BEFORE THE TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION : HYDERABAD.

FA.NO.17 OF 2024 AGAINST ORDERS IN CC.NO.393 OF 2022, DISTRICT CONSUMER COMMISSION-II, HYDERABAD Between:

United India Insurance Co.Ltd., Rep. by its Divisional Manager, Lal Chowk, Ananthan, Ananthnag-192 101.

Jammu & Kashmir.

.…Appellant/Opp.Party And M/s.Ajit Hut, rep. by its Proprietor cum Owner Mrs.Shahida Ali Khan, W/o.Hamid Ali Khan, Aged 83 years, Occ: Proprietor cum Owner, Resident of 8-2-204/1/A, Road No.6, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad – 500034.

…..Respondent/Complainant Counsel for the Appellant/Opp.Party: M/s.Kota Sameer Kumar Counsel for the Respondent/Complainant: M/s.Gopi Rajesh & Associates QUORAM:

HON’BLE SMT.MEENA RAMANATHAN…IN-CHARGE PRESIDENT &

HON’BLE SRI V.V.SESHUBABU, MEMBER-JUDICIAL TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND TWENTY FIVE *******

Order : (Per Smt.Meena Ramanathan, Hon’ble In-charge President)

1. This is an appeal filed by the Appellant/Opposite Party U/s.41 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, praying this Commission to set aside the orders passed in CC.No.393 of 2022 dated 9^th May, 2023 by the District Consumer Commission, Hyderabad-II by allowing the appeal with costs and may be pleased to pass such other or orders which are deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are described as arrayed in the complaint.

3. Briefly stated, the facts are that – the Complainant is the owner of the Ajit Hut situated at Langarbal, Pahalgam. It is submitted that the Complainant obtained a Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy from the Opposite Party Insurance Company bearing policy No.1114071119P102392456 valid from 26.06.2019 to 25.06.2020. A premium of Rs.19,212/- was paid to the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party insured the entire hut and covered the insurance for earthquake, STFI Cover, terrorism cover etc., and the same was clearly mentioned in the policy document.

4. On 21.08.2019, the above said hut was burnt by some anti- social elements. Immediately, the Complainant booked FIR No.34/2019 U/s.436 IPC, P.S. Pahalgam dated 21.08.2019 and a written complaint was given by the Caretaker of the hut i.e., Mohd.Yousuf Zagal, R/o. Langnai who is a chowkidar of hut. The Complainant informed about the said incident to the Opposite Party on 27.08.2019 through email. The Opposite Party appointed a Surveyor by name Syed Irfan Alam and verified the hut which was gutted in the fire by unknown anti-social elements. The Surveyor submitted the report on 24.02.2020 and net liability was fixed at Rs.17,50,500/- with depreciation of 50%.

5. It is submitted that the Opposite Party demanded the other documents which were already submitted by the Complainant and they were submitted once again through email. The original hut value is Rs.46,00,000/- and Rs.32,00,000/- was mutually agreed with the Opposite Party, but the Opposite Party illegally depreciated the amount to the tune of 50% and deposited only Rs.17,41,600/- instead of Rs.32,00,000/- and the Complainant received the said amount under protest. Therefore, the Complainant prays for the balance sum of Rs.14,58,400/-.

The present complaint is instituted against the unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party Insurance Company seeking redressal of their grievance as prayed under:

“To direct the Opposite Party to pay Rs.14,58,400/- along with interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of repudiation till the date of realization in respect of Policy bearing No.1114071119P102392456; to pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- towards mental agony and loss caused by the acts of the Opposite Party and also pay punitive damages U/s.14(1) of the Consumer Protection Act; to award costs of Rs.20,000/-. ”

6. The Opposite Party failed to appear before the Commission below despite service of notice and was set exparte on 18.08.2022.

7. Before the District Commission, the Complainant filed evidence affidavit as PW1 and Ex.A1 to A14 are ma