1. The fact of the case of complainant is that he insured his vehicle Mahindra Xylo vehicle bearing Regd. No. OD-33-N-7026 with the Opp. Party No. 2 vide policy no. 0158503142 00 valid from 17.07.2018 to 16.07.2019. It is alleged that on 25.06.2019 the said vehicle met with an accident at Srikarpur near Cuttack, for which he reported before Chauliaganj P.S. vide their G.D. No. 18 dated 25.06.2019 and intimated the matter to the O.P. No. 2 and as per their instructions, he sifted his vehicle to the garage of O.P. No. 3, where after conducting the survey by the O.P. No. 1, the O.P. No. 2 raised the pre-invoice bill for Rs. 1,09,588.42. It is further alleged that the O.P. No. 1 demanded Rs. 10,000/- to settle the insurance amount as per bill, accordingly complainant paid the said amount to O.P. No. 1 and paid Rs. 99,554/- as final bill amount to the O.P. No.3, whereas the O.P. No. 2 has released only Rs. 34,818/-.  It is further alleged that after paying the bill amount, the complainant met with O.P. No. 1 & 3 to settle the total bill amount, but both of them paid deaf ears and all efforts of complainant got in vein.  Thus alleging deficiency in service on the part of Opp. Parties, he filed this case claiming the claimed balance amount of Rs. 64,736/- with interest from O.P. No.2, to refund Rs. 10,000/- from O.P. No. 1 and O.P. No. 1 & 3 to pay Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation and costs of litigation to him.

2. O.P. No. 1 received the notice from the Fora, which was sent through Speed Post vide RL No. RO886653485IN on 17.10.2019 was validly served on him on 19.10.2019, but did not choose to appear in the case, nor filed his counter version nor also participated in the hearing even though several opportunities given to him for his submission keeping in view of natural justice, as such he was set exparte vide our order no. 5 dated 10.12.2019 and we lost every opportunities to hear from him and all the allegations made against him remained unchallenged and unrebuttal.
    
3. O.P. No. 2 appeared through their Ld. Counsel who filed counter versions admitting the issuance of insurance policy vide no. 0158503142 against the alleged accidental vehicle, but strictly denying the other allegations contending with only one plea that they have settled the insurance claim as per the survey report of O.P. No. 1 for an amount of Rs. 34,819.54 which was paid to the complainant and showing their no liabilities they prayed to dismiss the case.
    
4. O.P. No. 3 appeared and filed their counter version admitting the ownership of alleged vehicle of complainant and they have carried out the repair works of the alleged vehicle and also received an amount of Rs. 99,554/- from the complainant towards full and final repair bill and also they have admitted that the O.P. No. 2 has paid only Rs. 34,818/- and the balance amount was paid by complainant himself. It is contended that they have no knowledge regarding the payment of Rs. 10,000/- to the O.P. No. 1 by the complainant and never they have assured for early settlement of the insurance claim.  And with other contentions, showing no liability they prayed to dismiss the case.

5. Complainant has filed certain documents in support of his allegations, whereas the O.P. No. 2 & 3 did not choose the file any documents to prove their contentions.  Heard from the parties present and perused the material documents available therein.

6. It is an admitted fact that the complainant has insured his vehicle vide Regd. No. OD-33-N-7026 with the O.P. No. 2 vide policy no. 0158503142 00 valid from 17.07.2018 to 16.07.2019.  It is also an admitted fact that the alleged vehicle met with an accident and complainant reported the matter before Chauliaganj P.S. vide their G.D. No. 18 dated 25.06.2019 and intimated the matter to the O.P. No. 2.  Complainant filed to that effect.  It is alleged that as per the instructions of O.P. No.2, he shifted his vehicle to the garage of O.P. No. 3, where after conducting the survey by the O.P. No. 1, the O.P. No. 2 raised the pre-invoice bill for Rs. 1,09,588.42. Complainant filed document to that effect also.It is further alleged that the O.P. No. 1 demanded Rs. 10,000/- to settle the insurance claim as per bill amount, accordingly complainant paid the said amount to O.P. No. 1.Since the O.P. No. 1 did not choose to appear in this case nor challenged the versions of complainant, though he received the notice of the Fora, is well aware of the fact of the case, as such the allegations made against him remained unchallenged and unrebuttal.In this connection, we have fortified with the verdicts of the Hon’ble National Connection, in the case between Urban Improvement Trust, Bikaner, Rajasthan Vrs Babu Lal and Another, wherein Hon’ble National Commission has held that “Unrebutted averments shall be deemed to be admitted.” 

7. Further the allegations of complainant is that the total final repaired bill was raised for Rs. 99,554/- but the O.P. No. 2 has released only Rs. 34,818/-, whereas the contentions of O.P. No. 2 is that they have released the said amount as per assessment value of Rs. 34,818/- on the basis of survey report and assessment made by the O.P. No. 1.  Though the survey report is having vital value to settle the insurance claim, but the O.P. No. 2 has miserably failed to produce any survey report to prove their contentions inspite of repeated opportunities given to them.  And without any documentary evidence the plea of O.P. No. 2 cannot sustain and also the O.P. No. 2 is well aware of the same.  Further the O.P. No. 1 is totally silent over the fact.  Hence release of less amount of Rs. 34.818/- against the total repaired amount of Rs. 99,554/- without any cogent evidence, is not justified.

8. Further it is ascertained that there is no specific evidence from the side of complainant to prove the allegations made against the O.P. No. 3. 

9. As per the discussions made in the foregoing paras, in our view, the complainant is entitled to receive the entire repaired amount from the O.P. No. 2, as the O.P. No. 2 has received the premiums for total own damage and depreciation reimbursement of the alleged vehicle.  Further as per submissions of complainant and the material documents, it is observed that the complainant has tried his level best to get the genuine claims from the Opp. Party, but failed, for which he was compelled to file this case to seek proper reliefs, as such he is also entitled for some compensation and cost.  Hence this order.

                                                                                                                    ORDER

The complaint petition is allowed in part.  The O.P. No. 2 being the insurer of the alleged vehicle, is herewith directed to refund the balance repaired amount of Rs. 64,736/- within one 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which, the said amount will carry interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the case i.e. 14.10.2019 till payment.  Further the O.P. No.1 is herewith directed to refund the amount of Rs. 10,000/- being taken by him alongwith Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation for causing mental agony and financial loss as well as physical harassment and also to pay Rs. 5,000/- towards cost of litigation to the complainant within one month failing which the amount of Rs. 10,000/- will carry interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of filing of case to till payment.  No order against the O.P. No. 3.

   Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 16^th  day of September, 2020.

Issue free copy to the parties concerned.