##PAGE1##

I sc I cBr 129 I A176812019

Date of Filing :26.04.2019 Date of Disposal 24. 03.2026 :

BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE ^CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COM MISSION,

KALBURGI CIRCUIT BENCH DATED, THIS THE 24TH DAY OF ^MARC 2026

PRESENT

HON,BLE MT JUSTICE T G SHIVASHANKARE ^GOWDAI PRESIDENT

HON,BLE MTS DIVYASHREE M: LADY ^MEMBER

sclcBLl29l N76a/2OL9

Mr Veerabhadragouda S/o G Naganagounda Aged about 33 ^years

R/at Beachingar, 9th Cross Kappakal Road Appellant

Ballari-583 103 (By Mr Pate! Sidda ReddY, Advocate)

-Versus-

The Branch Manager IFFICO TOKIO GCNCTAI

Insurance Co. Ltd., Raghava Krishna Comples K C Road, Ballari-583 101 Respondent

Notice Served-Absent)

(

KSCDRC

##PAGE2##

2 sc lcBl l2e I Al768l2Ot9

: ORAL ORDER:

PER: Mr JUSTICE T G SHMSHANKARE ^GOWDA:

PRESIDENT

This Appeal is filed U/S 15 of the ^Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by the Complainant ^{(herein after} referred to as 'the Complainant'), challenging ^{the Order}

in dated 29.11.2018 passed ^{Consumer Complaint} No.94l2018 by the District Consumer ^{Disputes Redressal}

Commission, Bellary ⁽ⁱⁿ short'the ^{District Commission').}

2. The Appellant was the Complainant ^{and the} Respondent was the OP before the ^District, Commission. For ^the sake of convenience, ^the rank of the ^{parties shall} be referred to as per their status ^{before the District}

3. The brief facts of the ^case are ^{that; the Complainant} is the owner of Chevrolet Car bearing ^{Registration No.KA-} 53/MA-6658. He has obtained ^{an insurance policy from} OP vide policy bearing No.27125868, which ^{was valid from} 25.09.2017 to 24.09.2Ot8. On 30.10.2017 ^while

to Complainant was travelling from Shahpur ^{Ballari on}

KSCDRC

##PAGE3##

3 sc lcBt l2e I Al768l2or9

Maski-Lingasugur Road, all of a sudden, ^{cow came across the} road, he tried to avoid hitting the ^{cow, he has swerved the} car to left side and lost control, as ^{a result, the car}

was completely damaged.

3(a). The incident was reported to the ^{OP and the} investigator appointed by ^the OP ^has visited ^{the spot and} conducted the survey. Thereafter, the ^{car was shifted to} M/s Bellad Show Room, Bellary for repairs and ^the Complalnant incurred a sum of Rs.1,78,259l- ^towards repair expenses and also additionally ^{paid Rs.40,000/-} towards parking, service & towing charges. ^{As the claim} of the Complainant was not settled, ^{issued notice on} 21.05.2018, pleading deficiency in service, he ^{has filed the}

complaint.

4.

Before the District Commission, OP has opposed the Complaint by filing lts version, admitting that ^vehicle bearing Registration No. KA-53-MA-6658 was insured with OP and policy was in force as on the date of ^{accident. It}

their specific contention that the said car was not rs

KSCDRC

##PAGE4##

4 sc lcBt 129 I Al76a l2or9

involved in the accident. It is contended that insured ^had presented a fraudulent claim in respect of another vehicle which was damaged prior to the commencement of the very insurance policy. Hence, the claim was repudiated and same was communicated to the Complainant, Hence, there is no deficiency in service and sought for dismissal of

the Complaint.

5.

Before the District Commission, the Complainant and

one witness have filed their affidavit evidence as PW-1 & PW2 and 14 documents came to be marked as Ex-P1 to Pl4. On behalf of OP, its Legal Officer has filed his

affidavit evidence as RW1 and Ex-R1 to R7 marked.

6.

The District Commission after hearing the arguments of both the parties and relying on the report of the Surveyor, dismissed the Complaint. Aggrieved by the

same, Complainant has preferred this Appeal.

7.

We have heard the arguments of learned counsel for

the Complainant. Inspite of service of notice, OP remained

absent. KSCDRC

##PAGE5##

5 sclcBt 129 /Al76a l2o1e

8.

The Point that arises for our consideration is :-

Whether Order of the District Commission in dismissing the Complaint is perverse, illegal and calls

for our inteference?

: REASONS:

9. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the Complainant that the Surveyor's report was relied by the OP to deny the accident and the claim. It is further contended that the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document