Per Shri S.B.Mhase, Hon’ble President: There is delay of 6 days in filing the appeal. The advocate for the respondent has no objection to condone the delay, since it is technical one. Delay in filing the appeal is, therefore, condoned. Misc. Application no. 217/2010 for delay is allowed and accordingly stands disposed of. Heard both the advocates. This appeal takes an exception to an order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thane, whereby the District Forum has directed the appellant/insurance company to make payment of Rs.87,317/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from 15/10/2007. The appellant is further directed to pay Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.1,000/- for legal cost and expenses. The amounts were directed to be paid within 30 days and if not paid interest @ 3% p.a. will be chargeable. Following facts are admitted: that the respondent is a owner of Tata truck bearing registration no. MH-05-K-9898. Said truck was insured for an amount of Rs.3,12,500/- for a period commencing from 27/03/2006 to 26/03/2007. The accident admittedly has taken place on 18/12/2006. It was reported to the appellant. The appellant has carried out a survey. The surveyor has recommended an amount of Rs.10,000/- to be paid to the respondent/complainant. He has evaluated the total loss to Rs.24,990/- and out of that he has deducted 50% and after that it appears that he has further deduced an amount of Rs.2,000/- and also an amount of Rs.495/- was deducted approximately for salvage and thus recommended an amount of Rs.10,000/- that was not paid to the complainant and therefore the complainant filed consumer complaint and the said complaint was partly allowed. The only ground which is made by the appellant as reflected from written version para 6 is that, “after the surveyor’s assessment the opponent contacted the complainant over telephone for several times to sent the bills and receipts and original vehicular documents for verification but the complainant failed to comply with the requirements and therefore, the opponent closed the file as “No Claim”. What is important to be noted is that, that from the documents produced on record, it is revealed that documents were submitted as desired and intimated by the insurance company and in respect of that insurance company has granted a claim up to Rs.10,000/-. What is important to be noted is that, that it is a comprehensive policy and therefore, whatever damage complainant/respondent suffered was to be indemnified by the insurance company. The terms and conditions nowhere points out that compensation is to be calculated as suggested by the surveyor. In fact, the actual expenses which the complainant has incurred are required to be reimbursed and accordingly District Forum has passed the order. What is important to note is that, that amount which has been spent by the complainant for repairing the said vehicle is not in dispute between the appellant and complainant. Therefore, we find that order which has been passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum is just and proper which requires no interference. Hence, we pass the following order:- :-ORDER-: 1. Appeal stands rejected. 2. No order as to costs. 3. Dictated on dais in presence of both the parties. 4. Copies of the order herein be furnished to the parties as per rules. | 
