AFR / NAFR CHHATTISGARH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PANDRI, RAIPUR Date of Institution: 10/07/2025 Date of Final Hearing: 06/02/2026 Date of Pronouncement: 06/03/2026 APPEAL No.- SC/22/FA/366/2025 IN THE MATTER OF :

National Insurance Company Ltd., Through: Divisional Manager, Add.: Aakashganga, Supela, Bhilai, Tah. & Dist. Durg (C.G.) – 490 023 … Opposite Party/ Appellant Through: Shri P.K. Paul, Advocate Vs.

Vimal Sahu, S/o Shri Narayan Singh Sahu, R/o. Subhash Nagar, Nandani Road, Power House Bhilai, Tah. & Dist. Durg (C.G.) … Complainant/ Respondent Through: Smt. Rekha Ojha, Advocate CORAM: -

HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAUTAM CHOURDIYA, PRESIDENT HON’BLE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR VARMA, MEMBER PRESENT: -

Shri P.K. Paul, Advocate for the appellant.

Smt. Rekha Ojha, Advocate for the respondent.

O RD E R

PER: - JUSTICE GAUTAM CHOURDIYA, PRESIDENT This appeal, under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 (hereinafter called “the Act” for short), is preferred against order dated 06.06.2025 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Durg (CG) (hereinafter called “District Commission” for short) in Complaint Case No.CC/2020/175 whereby the complaint was partly allowed directing the opposite party / appellant herein to pay within thirty days to the complainant/ respondent Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs) towards IDV of the insured vehicle and in case of failure to pay the above amount within the stipulated period, to pay interest @ 7% p.a. on the said amount from the date of order till payment. Apart from that to pay Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac) towards compensation for mental loss and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) towards cost of litigation.

Aggrieved the opposite party insurer has preferred this appeal.

2. In nutshell the facts of the case are that the complainant/ respondent purchased vehicle number CG-07-CA-1171 with the help of finance provided by Cholamandalam Finance Company and insured the vehicle from the opposite party/ appellant insurance company for the period from 10.12.2015 to 09.12.2016. The insured vehicle was parked by the complainant/ respondent in front of his office on Nandani Road, near Shivdham Mandir Bhajan Singh Dhaba, at 11:00 pm on 25.06.2016. However, the vehicle was missing in the morning. A search was conducted for the truck, but when it was not found, an FIR was lodged at Jamul Police Station at 12:30 pm on 26.06.2016 and the same day the theft was reported to the opposite party/ appellant insurance company too. The complainant/ respondent submitted all the documents of the vehicle and the keys of the vehicle to the opposite party/ appellant insurance company, but till date the insurance amount regarding the theft of the vehicle has not been paid by the insurer, due to which, the complainant/ respondent had to pay the finance amount of the vehicle along with interest to the financier and had to suffer a lot of mental and financial loss. 3. Earlier, the complainant/ respondent submitted Complaint Case No.575/2017 on 10.08.2017 before the District Commission in which vide order dated 06.09.2019 it was ordered that the complainant/ respondent should provide all the documents regarding the driver of the alleged vehicle and the keys of the vehicle to the opposite party/ appellant insurer within 60 days and thereafter the opposite party / appellant to decide the claim within 30 days and in case the claim is not decided within 30 days the complainant/ respondent may file a fresh complaint before the District Commission. In compliance of which, on 19.11.2019, the complainant/ respondent submitted all the documents and the keys of the vehicle to the opposite party/ appellant insurer along with keys of the vehicle, but despite providing all the documents and information, the opposite party/ appellant did not provide any compensation to the complainant/ respondent regarding theft of the insured vehicle, hence, there was a need to present the complaint again, alleging the above action of