H. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SHIMLA.

First Appeal No. :SC/2/FA/97/2025 Date of Presentation :16.01.2025 Order Reserved on :01.12.2025 Date of Order :03.12.2025 _____

Smt. Alka Mishra W/o Sh. D.D. Mishra, R/o Village and P.O.

Nirmand, Tehsil Nirmand (Rampur Bushahar), District Kullu, H.P.

…… Appellant/Complainant.

Versus The New India Insurance (Assurance) Company, through its Divisional Manager, SDA Complex, Block No.7, Third Floor, Kasumpti, Shimla-9.

..…Respondent/Opposite Party.

Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Inder Singh Mehta, President Hon’ble Ms. Yogita Dutta Member

1 Whether approved for reporting? Yes.

For the Appellant: Mr.Rajeshwar Singh, Advocate vice Mr.

Mohinder Verma, Advocate.

For the Respondent: Mr.Jagdish Thakur, Advocate.

Justice Inder Singh Mehta, President O R D E R Instant appeal is arising out of the order dated

02.12.2024 passed by Learned District Consumer Commission,

1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the order?

Shimla, District Shimla, H.P. in Consumer Complaint Assurance Company, whereby, the complaint filed by the complainant was partly allowed and the opposite party was directed to pay a sum of Rs.4,64,214/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of complaint till its payment. The opposite party was further directed to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- to the complainant as compensation and Rs.20,000/- as costs of litigation.

Brief facts of Case:

2. Brief facts of the case are that complainant is owner of bus bearing No. HP-06B-1551 which was insured with the opposite party/insurance company w.e.f. 21.04.2015 to 20.04.2016 vide policy No. 35140831150100000039 for a sum of Rs.9,00,000/-. On 10.07.2015, the vehicle, in question, met with an accident at place Machada near Bhadrash, Tehsil Rampur Bushaher and at the time of accident, there were about 32 occupants, out of which 6 persons died. FIR was registered at Police Station, Rampur Bushaher and the opposite party/insurance company was also informed about the accident. On receiving intimation of accident, the insurance company appointed a surveyor who asked the complainant to get the vehicle repaired from authorized dealer and supply all the requisite documents. The complainant got repaired the vehicle from authorized dealer Dinesh Tata Automobile, from Bhadaur, District Barnala and from M/s. Kissan Motors Bhatinda and spent Rs. 9,83,329/-. Thereafter, complainant submitted all the documents alongwith bills to the surveyor with the request to settle the claim of the complainant, but the insurance company rejected the claim of the complainant on the ground that driving licence of driver was not genuine. The complainant herself has got verified the licence of the driver from concerned authority and the same was found correct. Therefore, the insurance company has wrongly repudiated the claim of the complainant and said act on the part of opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence, the present complaint.

3. The opposite party/insurance company filed reply and stated that the vehicle, in question, was insured with the insurance company for a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- w.e.f. 17.10.2014 to 16.10.2015. On receipt of intimation of accident, the insurance company appointed Sh. Dinesh Kumar Surveyor and Loss Assessor who conducted the final survey and submitted his report dated 21.9.2015 and assessed the loss caused to the vehicle to the tune of Rs.4,56,714/- on repair basis subject to the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The insurance company also appointed an Investigator Sh. Kamal Narayan (Retd.) Dy SP and during investigation he found that driving licence No.146637/UKL in the name of Sh. Ved Parkash S/o Sh. Puran Chand resident of village Damroli, District Shimla, H.P. is not genuine. Thereafter, claim of the complainant was repudiated vide letter dated 1.11.2017. There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party and prays