9. Considering the evidence on both sides, and fraction of condition of limitation as to use of the vehicle at the time of accident; nevertheless, the Forum cannot be impervious to the guidelines for settlement of non-standard claim even in respect of the breach of the warranty /condition of the policy including limitation as to use as clearly laid down by Hon'ble National Commission in case reported as National Insurance Company vs. Sanjay Shiv Hare (iv) 2007 CPJ366 (NC) and relied upon earlier case of Kesar Ben vs. United India Insurance Company III (2000) CPJ 36 NC guidelines in clause 2 interalia for settlement of non-standard claim that three types of claim shall be considered as non standard and shall be settled as :<br /> i) Under declaration of Deduct 3 years difference<br /> in premium from<br /> licensed carrying capacity. amount of claim or 25%<br /> of the claim amount <br /> whichever is higher.<br /> <br /> ii) Overloading of vehicles beyond Pay claim not exceeding<br /> 75% of admissible claim. <br /> licensed carrying capacity.<br /> <br /> iii) Any other breach of warranty/condition Pay upto 75% of <br /> of policy including limitation as to use. admissible claim.<br /> <br /> . Therefore, sub clause (iii) clearly attracted in the present case regarding breach of warranty/condition of the policy including limitation as to use wherein insurance Company is required to settle the claim on non standard basis as per above prescribed guidelines i.e. upto 75% of the admissible claim. <br /> 10. Apropos the assessment of the loss of the accidental vehicle, opposite party filed survey report Ex.RX dated 23/10/2006 in which he has clearly opined loss on the bais of salvage loss basis for Rs.3,24,000/- being full and final settlement of insurance claim after considering extensive damage to the vehicle and its component parts and also manufacturing year of the vehicle 2004. It is settled that surveyors appointed under the Insurance Act are considered to be independent loss assessors and therefore they are authorised to inspect the insured vehicle under the Insurance Act as clearly laid down in case reported as 2006 CTJ 652 S.A. Bhagwan Shetty vs. United India Insurance Company . Apropos the quatum of compensation as it is clearly held interalia in case reported as National Insurance Company vs. Sanjay Shiv Hare (supra) that breach of terms of the policy is restricted only to its use for hire or reward" even in such case guidelines especially provide that with regard to the user, if there is breach it is not to be considered as flagrant violation; otherwise they would not have provided that in such cases 75% of the amount should be paid.<br /> In the ultimate analysis of aforesaid discussion and in the light of guidelines, we accept the claim of the complainant partly to the extent of 75% of the admissible claim i.e. salvage loss basis of Rs.3,24,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of repudiation till realisation and further monetary compensation of Rs.10,000/- for mental agony and physical harassment due to deficiency in service and Rs.1500/- as cost of litigation payable by the opposite party to the complainant within a period of one month from the receipt of copy of this order.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Let certified copies of judgment rendered be supplied/despatched to the parties without any unnecessary delay and thereafter file be consigned to record room.<br /> <br /> Announced (Surinder Mittal ) ( A.K. Sharma )<br /> 29.4.2008 Member President.