United India Insurance Company Limited, petitioner herein, was the opposite party before the District Forum.

Complainant/respondent is the owner of Truck No. BR-12/8281 which was comprehensively insured with the petitioner insurance company.  The said policy was valid from 30.5.1997 to 29.5.1998.  On 01.9.1997 the truck met with an accident on G.T. Road within the

-2-

jurisdiction of Pandoral Police Station West Bengal for which MA Case No.22/1997 dated 02.9.1997 was registered.  Insurance company on information appointed Sh. Pradeep Kumar Mukharjee for spot verification.  He submitted his report dated 05.9.1997.  Later on, petitioner appointed Mr. Naveen Chandra, another Surveyor for assessing the loss and damage to the vehicle, who after surveying the vehicle prepared the assessment of loss of Rs.1,01,256/-.  After the loss assessment prepared by Naveen Chandra, the respondent got the vehicle repaired and submitted the bills to petitioner insurance company with a request to receive the salvage also.  Instead of paying the amount, petitioner deputed another Surveyor                        Sh. Raghvendra Kumar Aggarwal for re-inspection of the vehicle who submitted the report that the vehicle had been repaired according to the assessment made by the earlier Surveyor.  Instead of settling the claim, petitioner appointed another Surveyor Sh. Raj Kumar who also submitted his report.  Thereafter, the petitioner made an offer to settle the claim of the respondent on payment of Rs.41,399/- which the respondent did not accept.  As the claim was not settled, the respondent filed a complaint before the District Forum.

-3-

District Forum on appreciation of evidence produced before it dismissed the complaint holding it to be barred by limitation.  Aggrieved by this, respondent filed an appeal before the State Commission.

The State Commission came to the conclusion that the complaint was not barred by limitation.  Petitioner insurance company had failed to settle the claim even after appointing four Surveyors.  Since the claim of the respondent had not been finally repudiated, the claim was not barred by limitation.  The State Commission accepted the appeal and held that the petitioner would be entitled to the sum of Rs.1,01,256/- as had been assessed by the Surveyor.

Counsel for the parties have been heard at length.

We have gone through the order of the State Commission as well as that of the District Forum.  It would be seen that the petitioner had appointed four Surveyors one after the other.  The first Surveyor was appointed for spot inspection; the second Surveyor was appointed for assessment of loss; the third Surveyor was appointed to verify as to whether the vehicle had been repaired as per the bills produced by the respondent and the fourth Surveyor was appointed

-4-

on the premise that the earlier assessment was wrong.  Petitioner kept on appointing one Surveyor after the other against the IRDA Regulations without recording any reasons for doing so.  Petitioner has not explained as to why it was necessary to appoint the third and fourth Surveyor. 

We agree with the view taken by the State Commission that the complaint filed by the respondent was not barred by limitation as the petitioner had not repudiated the claim of the respondent at any stage.  It was simply dragging on the settlement of claim, aggrieved against which the respondent filed a complaint before the District Forum.  Out of the four Surveyors, only second Surveyor Mr. Naveen Chandra has assessed the loss and the State Commission has directed the petitioner to pay the amount as per the assessment made by Sh. Naveen Chandra, the 2^nd Surveyor.  No Merits.  Dismissed.    

Respondent had asked the petitioner to take the salvage which the petitioner has not taken.  Respondent is directed to hand over the salvage and the petitioner would be at liberty to take the salvage. 

-5-

This Commission had directed the petitioner on 11.8.2006 to deposit Rs.41,000/- along with the interest @ 10% p.a. by way of Bank Draft within four weeks.  In case the said amount is deposited with the Commission, Registrar is directed to release the same in favour of the respondent along with accrued interest thereon.

Petitioner is directed to pay the balance amount along with interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of submission of the report by the Surveyor till realization and the costs awarded by the State Commission within a period of six weeks.

It may be observed that in case the petitioner has not deposited the sum of Rs.41,000/- as directed on 11.8.2010, petitioner shall pay the entire amount along with interest @ 10% from the date of submission of report of Surveyor till realization.