By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,<br /> <br /> <br /> 1. The grievance of the complainant is that, although he incurred expenses of Rs.32,800/- (Rs.16,000/- as cost of spares + Rs.6,800/- for labour charges) for repairing his vehicle which sustained damages in an accident, opposite party has paid only Rs.4,000/- which is very low and insufficient. He alleges deficiency in service and claims the balance of Rs.18,800/- along with interest @ 12% and compensation of Rs.10,000/- together with cost of Rs.2,000/-.<br /> <br /> <br /> 2. Opposite party has filed version admitting that the vehicle KL10-P 5069 is insured with opposite party and that this vehicle met with an accident and sustained damages. It is submitted that complainant preferred a claim for Rs.22,800/-. That surveyor was deputed for assessing the damages and the amount was paid as per the report of surveyor after deducting permissible depreciation. The amount was received by the complainant without any protest. There is no deficiency in service and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.<br /> <br /> 3. Evidence consists of affidavit filed by complainant and Exts.A1 to A4 marked for the complainant. Affidavit was filed by opposite party and Exts.B1 to B4 marked on behalf of opposite party.<br /> <br /> 4. The only question for consideration is with respect to the quantum of compensation. Ext.A1 is the survey report. The vehicle involved in the accident is a TATA 2002 model stage carriage (HPV). The accident occurred on 24-5-05. Ext.A3 series are the photographs of the vehicle after the accident. Admittedly Rs.4,000/- is the amount paid for reimbursement of repair charges. It is evident from the photographs that the expenses for labour charges assessed by the surveyorin Ext.A1 is insufficient. As per the com-plaint the amount incurred for expenses is Rs.32,800/-. But in Ext.B2, which is the claim form the damages stated is Rs.20,000/-. The amount stated in Ext.A2(a) bill for labour charges also vary. These documents prove that complainant does not have a consistent case regarding the expenses for repairing the vehicle. No reliable evidence is adduced by complainant why the surveyor's report has to be totally disregarded. Taking into account the damages sustained by the vehicle as per Ext.A3 photographs we are of the view that an amount of Rs.1,000/- can be awarded in addition tot he labour charges of Rs.3,000/- which is allowed by the company. Ext.A3 proves that the labour charges assessed by surveyor is very low.<br /> <br /> 5. In the result, we partly allow the complaint and order opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) as compensation to the complainant within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. We make no order as to costs.<br /> <br /> Dated this 5th day of July, 2008.<br /> <br /> Sd/- <br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> APPENDIX<br /> <br /> <br /> Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil <br /> Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A4<br /> Ext.A1 : Private and Confidential Motor (Final) Survey report dated,<br /> 14-6-05 prepared by N.Vinod Kumar, Insurance Surveyor.<br /> Ext.A2(series) : Bill for Rs.6,200/- dated, 25-5-05. <br /> Ext.A3 : Photographs(12 Nos.).<br /> Ext.A4 : Photo copy of the letter send by opposite party. <br /> Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Ext.B1 to B4<br /> Ext.B1 : Photo copy of the Certificate of Insurance of Passengers Carrying<br /> Commercial vehicle in respect of KL10-P 5069<br /> Ext.B2 : Motor claim form submitted by complainant to opposite party.<br /> Ext.B3 : Certificate of Registration in respect of KL10-P 5069<br /> Ext.B4 : Bill for Rs.17,450/- dated, 25-5-05.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/- <br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER<br />