| Final Order / Judgement | Date of filing:17.04.2017 Date of Disposal:25.05.2023 BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMR DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH) DATED: 25th Day of May 2023 PRESENT HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE HULUVADI G. RAMESH: PRESIDENT Mr K. B. SANGANNANAVAR: JUDICIAL MEMBER Mrs DIVYASHREE M: LADY MEMBER APPEAL NO.901/2017 O R D E R BY HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT - This Appeal filed by OP under Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, aggrieved by an order dated 12.01.2017, passed in CC/62/2016 by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Koppal (herein after referred as District Forum/Commission and the parties arrayed as in the consumer complaint)
- Commission examined grounds of appeal, impugned order, appeal papers and heard learned counsels.
- Complainant raised Consumer Complaint before the Forum below alleging deficiency in service on the part of OP for not settling the claim in total of Rs.3,52,000/- in respect of damaged vehicle, instead settled only to the tune of Rs.29,500/- Contrary, OP appeared through learned counsel and contested the matter. After enquiry, Forum below recorded findings in favour of complainant and directed OP to pay remaining balance of the vehicle policy claim of Rs.2,05,482/- towards the repair of the vehicle and Rs.3,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service and Rs.1,500/- towards litigation expenses to the complainant within 45 days from the date of receipt of the order. Failing which, 12% p.a. interest will be charged from the date of filing of compliant till realization. It is this order being assailed in this appeal contending that impugned order is contrary to law and facts since appellant/insurer had settled the claim as per the Surveyor Report. It is to be noted herein that appellant/OP had appointed licensed surveyor by name M.Kiran Kumar to assess the loss caused to the accidental vehicle. The said surveyor after inspecting the vehicle had assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.29,500/-. The Assessment Summary which is in Survey Report dated 15.06.2016 clearly shows as to how the surveyor had assessed the loss caused to the accidental vehicle. The Forum below failed to look into the Survey Report and the terms and conditions of the policy. No doubt the Forum below passed the impugned order stating that, the report of a surveyor being an important document has sustained evidentiary value unless it is displaced by more credible evidence. In our view, when licensed surveyors are appointed under the Insurance Act, their report cannot be pushed aside contending that there are no credible evidence supporting to Surveyor Report since surveyor's reports are the main document on which the insurance claims are settled. Moreover, the surveyor to assess the loss of the insured vehicle had visited M/s. HKGN Engineering and Enterprises, Hosapete, the authorised dealers for vehicle. As per Ex.A10 this authorised dealers for vehicle had given the estimation bill to the tune of Rs.81,000/-. Thus the surveyor after calculating in detail had assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.29,500/-. Hence without any reasons, the surveyor's report cannot be disregarded. The Insurance Company has already paid as per the loss assessed by the surveyor and nothing remains due to the complainant. With such conclusion, we proceed to allow this appeal by setting aside the impugned order passed by the Forum below dated 12.01.2017 in CC/62/2016. Accordingly CC/62/2016 is dismissed with no order as to costs.
- The Amount in deposit is directed refund to appellant with proper identification by his advocate.
- Send a copy of this Order to the District Commission and parties to the appeal.
Lady Member Judicial Member President *GGH* | |
