STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD – Appellant
Versus
ABDUL MAJEED – Respondent
SC/32/A/629/2017
##PAGE1##
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
KERALA
FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/32/A/629/2017
MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD
PRESENT ADDRESS - KOZHIKODE ROAD, MANJERI.P.O, MALAPPURAM,KERALA.
.......Appellant(s)
Versus
ABDUL MAJEED
PRESENT ADDRESS - AYSHA BUILDING, MANJERI ROAD, WANDOOR.P.O,
MALAPPURAM,KERALA.
.......Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SRI.B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR , PRESIDENT
HON'BLE MR. SRI.AJITH KUMAR.D , JUDICIAL MEMBER
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN.K.R , MEMBER
FOR THE APPELLANT:
NEMO
FOR THE RESPONDENT:
NEMO
DATED: 28/01/2026
ORDER
KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
APPEAL No.629/2017
ORDER DATED : 28.01.2026
(Against the in C.C.No.301/2014 on the files of DCDRC, Malappuram)
PRESENT:
HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR : PRESIDENT
SRI. AJITH KUMAR D. : JUDICIAL MEMBER
##PAGE2##SRI.K.R.RADHAKRISHNAN : MEMBER
APPELLANT:
Manager, M/s National Insurance Co. Ltd., Kozhikode Road, Manjeri P.O.,
Malappuram
(by Adv. Prasanna Kumar Nair)
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
Abdul Majeed, S/o Kuttiman, Aysha Building, Manjeri Road, Wandoor P.O.,
residing at Puthyath House, High School Road, Wandoor P.O., Malappuram
ORDER
HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR : PRESIDENT
The appellant is the opposite party in C.C.No.301/2014 on the files of the
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Malappuram (for short, ‘the
District Commission’).
##PAGE3##2. The complainant was the registered owner of a Maruthi Swift car bearing
registration No. KL 10 AD 5885 which had insurance coverage for the period from
28.08.2013 to 27.08.2014 issued by the opposite party. While so, on 19.10.2013, the
car met with an accident and as a consequence, the car sustained damage. The car was
taken to the workshop as per the instruction of the insurance surveyor. The estimate
for the repair supplied by the workshop was Rs.2,58,000/-. Since the said amount was
exorbitant, the car was taken to ABS Motors, Nilambur for repair. ABS Motors
estimated the repair charges as Rs.2,11,107/-. The surveyor also accepted the said
proposal. As per the directions of the opposite party, the complainant paid the bill
amount of Rs.2 lakh to ABS Motors after getting the car repaired. Thereafter, the
complainant submitted the claim before the opposite party. However, the claim was
not honoured by the opposite party, stating that the son of the complainant was driving
the motor vehicle at the relevant time and that he was drunk while driving the vehicle.
The complainant was actually driving the vehicle at the relevant time.
3. The opposite party filed a written version admitting the ownership and the
policy coverage of the vehicle. However, the opposite party contended that the son of
the complainant, namely, Baiju P. Majeed was driving the vehicle at the relevant time.
He was accompanied by his friend Savaf also. In the accident, both Baiju and Savaf
sustained injuries. The doctor who examined Baiju reported that he was in a state of
drunkenness. The accident was reported to the opposite party by the said Baiju. The
##PAGE4##claim form was also signed by him and not by the complainant. No police case was
registered in connection with the incident. The opposite party deputed an investigator
and the investigator took the signed statements of the complainant, his son Baiju and a
third party. The surveyor reported that the net liability of the opposite party was
Rs.1,09,704/- and the surveyor filed a report in this regard before the opposite party on
22.12.2013.
4. Before the District Commission, both the complainant and the manager of
the opposite party filed proof affidavit. Exhibits A1 to A5 were marked for the
complainant and Exhibits B1 to B9 were marked for the opposite party. After
evaluating the evidence, the District Commission directed the opposite party to pay
Rs.1,09,704/- towards the expenses for repairing the vehicle, to the complainant. The
District Commission further directed the opposite party to pay Rs.30,000/- as
compensation for the deficiency in service and Rs.10,000/- as costs.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.