##PAGE1##

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

KERALA

FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/32/A/361/2014

MR ABEL JACOB

PRESENT ADDRESS - VALAYIL HOUSE, ERUMPANAM P.O, THIRUVANKULAM,

THRIPUNITHURA,KERALA.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus

THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD

PRESENT ADDRESS - 3, MIDDLETON STREET, CALCUTTA- 700071,KERALA.

THE GENERAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

PRESENT ADDRESS - KOCHI DIVISIONAL OFFICE, IST FLOOR, AJAY VIHAR, M.G ROAD,

KOCHI -16,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: 05/02/2026

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL No.156/2014 & APPEAL No.361/2014

COMMON ORDER DATED : 05.02.2026

(Against the order in C.C.No.161/2012 on the files of DCDRC, Ernakulam)

PRESENT:

##PAGE2##

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. B. SUDHEENDRA : PRESIDENT

KUMAR

SRI. AJITH KUMAR D. : JUDICIAL MEMBER

SRI.K.R.RADHAKRISHNAN : MEMBER

APPEAL No.156/2014

APPELLANTS:

1.

The National Insurance Co.Ltd, Regd. Office 3, Middleton Street, Calcutta

– 700 071

2.

The General Manager, National Insurance Co.Ltd, Kochi Divisional Office,

st

I Floor, Ajay Vihar, M.G.Road

(by Adv. S.Rajeev)

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

Abel Jacob, Valayil House, Erumapuram P.O, Thiruvankulam,

Thirupunithura – 682 309

(by Adv. Dinesh R.Shenoy, Adv. Sajeev.S.R, & Adv. Kiran.H)

##PAGE3##

APPEAL No.361/2014

APPELLANT:

Abel Jacob, Valayil House, Erumapuram P.O, Thiruvankulam,

Thirupunithura – 682 309

(by Adv. Dinesh R.Shenoy, Adv. Sajeev.S.R , & Adv. Kiran.H)

Vs.

RESPONDENTS:

1.

The National Insurance Co.Ltd, Regd. Office 3,

Middleton Street, Calcutta – 700 071

2.

The General Manager, National Insurance Co.Ltd, Kochi Divisional Office,

st

I Floor, Ajay Vihar, M.G.Road

(by Adv. S.Rajeev)

##PAGE4##

COMMON ORDER

SRI. K.R. RADHAKRISHNAN : MEMBER

These appeals are filed under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986,

against the order dated 21.12.2013 on the files of the District Consumer Disputes

Redressal Commission, Ernakulam (for short, the ‘District Commission’).

2. As per the order, the District Commission partly allowed the complaint

and directed the opposite party to pay the amount assessed by the surveyor as per

Exhibit B3 with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of complaint till

realisation. Both the complainant and the opposite party challenged the said order.

Appeal No.156/2014 is filed by the opposite party and appeal No.361/2014 is filed by

the complainant. Both the appeals are considered together as these appeals have arisen

out of the same order.

3. Brief details of the complaint are as follows: -

The complainant purchased a Maruti Swift VDI Diesel Car on 23.05.2011 which

was registered as KL 39C 9339. The vehicle was insured with the opposite party

insurer vide policy No. 121246109 for the period from 23.05.2011 to 22.05.2012 for

an Insured’s Declared Value (IDV) for Rs.5,14,670/- (Rupees Five Lakh Fourteen

##PAGE5##

Thousand Six Hundred and Seventy only). The vehicle met with an accident on

22.07.2011 near Moovattupuzha. The vehicle fell into a small muddy ditch while

trying to avoid hitting a dog. The complainant’s wife who had driven the vehicle,

moved the vehicle from the spot to park the same on the side of the road to avoid the

traffic block on the road. Immediately after the accident she contacted M/s Popular

Vehicles & Services Ltd, Vytila, who took the vehicle to their service centre. The

complainant submitted the claim form and repair estimate to the insurer who deputed a

surveyor to assess the loss. He repaired the vehicle and paid an amount of

Rs.1,34,949/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirty Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty Nine

only) towards repair charges. However, the insurer was not ready to settle the claim

for this amount and they offered only an amount of Rs.25,876/- (Rupees Twenty Five

thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy Six only) as per their letter dated 01.12.2011.

They informed that as per the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document