ORDER NO. 6 DT. 10.08.2011

HON’BLE JUSTICE MR.P.K.SAMANTA,PRESIDENT

Both sides are present through their respective Ld. Advocates.  Heard them in full.  Judgement is delivered as under :-

This Appeal is by the insurer against the judgement and order dt. 21.5.10 passed by the Birbhum (Suri) District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in C.F. Case No. CC/51/2008 allowing the complaint case.  It is not in dispute that the car in question was insured by the insurer for the period from 2.2.07 till the midnight of 1.2.08.  The certificate of insurance policy has been proved in evidence before the Forum below (Ext. 4).  It has also been proved in evidence that the insured vehicle met with an accident on 20.12.07, for which an FIR was lodged.  The said FIR has been marked as Ext. 1 before the Forum below.  On the basis of the said FIR, Md. Bazar P.S. M.A. Case No. 21/07 dt. 21.12.07 was started.  Photographs of the damaged car were produced in evidence (Ext.9).  On the strength of the aforesaid material documents the involvement of the insured vehicle in an accident and consequent damage caused to the car was thus established.  The complainant accordingly raised a claim for indemnifying the loss suffered by him due to the damage of the car in the said accident.  The insured by a letter dt. 3.11.08 (Ext. 3) closed the claim case as no-claim.

Before the Forum below the insurer/Appellant has not been able to rebut the evidence as above showing the involvement of the car in the said accident.  It has been alleged at the hearing of this Appeal that the surveyor and the loss-assessor engaged by the insurer had submitted a report alleging that the said accident had occurred due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the insured vehicle.  Most unfortunately the report of the said surveyor and/or loss-assessor had never seen the light of the day.  Furthermore, the Appellant/Insurer has not produced a single evidence to show that in spite of the said accident the car did not suffer any damage whatsoever.  Nor did it satisfy this Commission on the basis of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy that in the facts and circumstances of this case the complainant was not entitled to be indemnified upto the amount of IDV. 

We, therefore, do not find any reason whatsoever to interfere with the impugned order.  The judgement and order of the Forum below allowing the complaint case is thus affirmed.  This Appeal is accordingly dismissed.