BEFORE THE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ATHYDERABAD.

F.A.No.1538/2008 against C.C.No.06/2008, District Forum, KADAPA.

Between:

The Divisional Manager

United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,

Officers Club, Kadapa.                                                                                                        

G.Purushotham S/o.Krishnaiah

Aged about 55 years,

R/o.D.No.1/1181-1,

Gandhinagar, Kadapa.                                                                                                                            

Counsel for the Appellant:

Counsel for the Respondent: -Mr.G.Vijaya Kumar

QUORUM:  THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT                               SMT.M.SHREESHA,.

FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF MARCH,

TWO THOUSAND ELEVEN

Oral order:(Per Hon’ble Justice Sri D.Appa Rao, President)
***

This is an appeal preferred by the insurance company against the order of the District Forum directing it to pay Rs.1,58,480/- towards damages caused to the vehicle.

The case of the complainant in brief is that the Scorpio vehicle owned by him was covered by an insurance policy covering the period from 15-8-2006 to 14-8-2007.           

The insurance company resisted the case.   

The complainant in proof of his case filed his affidavit evidence and got Exs.A1 to A8 marked while the insurance company filed the affidavit of its officer and got marked Exs.B1 to B8.

The District Forum after considering the evidence placed on record opined that the bills filed by the complainant show that an amount of Rs.1,58,480/- has been spent towards repairs and therefore directed the insurance company to pay the said amount of Rs.1,58,480/-.

Aggrieved by the said order, the insurance company preferred this appeal contending that the District Forum ought to have relied on the report of the surveyor.  

It is an undisputed fact that on 30-4-2007 the vehicle of the complainant met with an accident which was covered by an insurance policy issued by the appellant.           SRI VENKATESWARA SYNDICATE v. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. Ltd. & anotherreported in) held that

‘insurance company cannot discard reports of various surveyors till getting a favourable report’.’

No reason whatsoever was assigned as to why the insurance company has appointed a third surveyor. The third surveyor vide his report, Ex.B2, noted various replacements that were made to the vehicle.         

In the result this appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.  

Sd/-PRESIDENT.

Sd/-MEMBER.

JM