KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACADU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL NO:163/2010 JUDGMENT DATED:20..04..2010 PRESENT JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT SHRI.M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER The Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd., 92 East Coast Chambers, 1st Floor, G.N.Chetty Road, T.Nagar, Chennai-17. : APPELLANT R/by The Assistant Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Office No:1, Kottarathil Bldgs., Palayalam, TVPM. (By Adv: Sri.M.Nizamudeen) Vs. Abdul Rahiman E.K, S/o Ibrahim Haji, “Ibrahim Manzil”, Kottikulam, : RESPONDENT Bekal.P.O, Kasaragod District-671 318. JUDGMENT JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party in CC:139/2009 in the file of CDRF, Kasaragod. The appellant/insurer is under orders to pay a sum of Rs.60,000/- and cost of Rs.2000/-. 2. It is the case of the complainant that his Maruthi Alto Car insured with the appellant met with an accident on 31/01/2007 and as instructed by the appellant the vehicle was taken to the repairer. The Surveyor inspected the vehicle without intimating him. The appellant has issued a voucher only for Rs.29,200/-. According to him he has incurred Rs.81,012/- towards the repair. 3. It is the contention of the opposite party/appellant that the amount offered is as per the survey report and the survey report cannot be by-passed. 4. The evidence adduced consisted of the testimony of PW1, DW1, Exts.A1 to A3 and B1 to B5. 5. It is seen from the order that the complainant has produced A1 series of bills 10 in numbers and copies of the bills of spare parts and repair charges. The total bill amount comes to Rs.95,113/-. 6. It is the contention of the appellant that the complainant did not co-operate and that the surveyor could assess only the approximate cost for the repair that could be seen on external examination of the vehicle and that the internal damages could not be inspected as the complainant was not present. DW1 the surveyor who testified has also deposed accordingly. PW1, the complainant has testified in proof of the documents produced. Evidently Ext.B2 survey report mentioning the cost of repairs as Rs.29,200/- would not reflect the correct amount required for repairs. We find that in the present case there is no proper survey report. There can be no detailed survey report in the matter as the vehicle has already been repaired and no re-inspection was conducted by the surveyor. It was in the above circumstances that the Forum assessed the amount on a global basis and awarded Rs.60,000/- although the bills amounted to Rs.95,113/-. We find that the amount awarded is only reasonable. 7. We find that there is no scope for admitting the appeal. In the result the appeal is dismissed in-limine. Office will forward a copy of this order to the Forum urgently. JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER VL. | 
