as per terms and conditions of the Insurance <br /> Policy"<br /> Similar case has been decided by our HON'BLE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI In case cited as III (2008) C.P.J. PAGE 158 (N.C.) PARDEEP KUMAR SHARMA Versus NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY wherein it is held that "Assessment of loss - Surveyor's report an important document cannot be wished aside without any compelling evidence to contrary<br /> Then independent surveyor Mr. Sanjeev Khanna was appointed by the insurance company who after survey had assessed the loss on total loss basis after deducting net of salvage loss liability from the total loss basis to the tune of Rs.1,79,000/- and submitted his report on 11.6.2008 vide report Ex. R4. As such, how the insurance company wriggle out from this report.<br /> 13. The Insurance company took the plea that the complainant did not reply to its letters written vide Ex.R5 to Ex.R7. <br /> -8-<br /> So it declare the claim of the complainant as no claim for want of information/various documents vide Ex. R8. <br /> 14. The Insurance Company opposite party No. 1 however is not competent to demand the above documents from the complainant.<br /> As a matter of fact, the claim of the complainant is with regard to the accident of vehicle and not to the injuries sustained by the driver Pawan Kumar. Superfluous points have been raised pertaining to the contact number of the driver of the tractor trolly with which the vehicle has met the accident and copy of compromise,if any between th parties. between the owner of tractor trolly and complainant. The contact number of the cyclist involved in the accident, pension account of Jail Singh, Car loan account statement and details of T.P./ Loss injury alongwith legible copy of DDR/FIR, are absolutely not required to settle the claim.<br /> 15. Here the question involved is the claim with regard to <br /> damage of the vehicle and not relating to insurance of the driver. It has been held by the Apex Court in case New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Asha Rani and others reported in ACJ Vol-I 2003 Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that "If the owner of the goods or his authorized representative dies or sustains injuries while travelling in goods vehicle, then the insurer of the vehicle is not liable <br /> to pay any compensation. In the instant case, the insurance of the vehicle is not for the death or bodily injures of the owner or his representative. It is claim for the damage to the vehicle caused by accident for which the complainant has comprehensive policy, so there is no violation of the policy condition. <br /> -9-<br /> 16. It is really strange that the insurance company is not settling the claim of the complainant regarding damage of the vehicle without any valid reason.<br /> 17. In view of the above discussion, we allow the complaint with costs as under:-<br /> i) The complainant is entitled to Rs.1,79,000/- as assessed by Mr. Sanjeev Khanna Surveyor of the opposite parties alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of accident till realization.<br /> ii) To pay Rs.7,000/-to the complainant on account of mental<br /> mention, harassment<br /> iii) To pay Rs.3000/- as litigation expenses <br /> iv) To pay Rs.1200/- as crain charges<br /> payable to the complainant within one month from the receipt of copy of this judgment. Let certified copy of the judgment be sent to the parties through registered post free of costs without any delay. File be consigned to the record room.<br /> <br /> Dated: Gulshan Prashar Shashi Narang Paramjit Singh<br /> 20.11.2008 Member Member President<br /> <br /> <br />