1.        The brief history of the case of the complainant is that, she insured her Tata Indigo ECS Car bearing No. OR 10H-6603 with the Ops vide Policy No.3368/00437896/000/03 for the period from 27.4.2014 to 26.4.2015 and the same car met with an accident on 29.11.2014 near RTO office, Koraput causing severe damage to the insured vehicle.  On intimation, the Ops sent Surveyor, Sri Bipin Bihari Patra who inspected the vehicle and took photographs and the vehicle was shifted to M/s. Way Automatives, Jeypore for repair.  It is submitted that the repairer estimated the cost of repair at Rs.2, 95, 691/- and the estimate along with other papers were submitted with OP.1 for settlement of claim.  It is further submitted that in spite of several personal approaches and correspondences as the Ops did not settle the claim, the complainant got issued registered notice to the Ops through her Advocate requesting settlement of claim but in vain.  Thus alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Ops, she filed this case praying the Forum to direct the Ops to pay Rs.2, 95,691/- towards cost of repair with interest @ 18% p.a. and to pay Rs.1.00 lac towards compensation to the complainant.

2.                     The Ops 1 & 2 filed counter in joint denying the allegations of the complainant but admitted about the insurance taken by the complainant in respect of her vehicle bearing No. OR 10H-6603 vide Policy No.3368/00437896/000/03 valid till 26.4.2015 subject to terms of the policy.  It is contended that on being intimated regarding to the accident to the insured vehicle, the Ops deputed their surveyor who assessed loss at Rs.2, 10, 000/- and the Ops sent letters to the complainant on 05.01.2015 and 03.02.2015 to produce several documents to which the complainant produced.  It is further submitted that the complainant is seeking more than the settled amount which is not covered under law.  Thus denying any deficiency in service on their part along with other preliminary issues the Ops prayed to dismiss the case of the complainant.

3.                     Parties have filed certain documents along with affidavits in support of their cases.  Heard from the parties through their respective A/Rs and perused the materials available on record.

4.                     In this case insurance policy bearing No.3368/00437896/000/03 valid till 26.4.2015 issued by the Ops to vehicle No.OR-10H-6603 of the complainant and the fact of accident to the insured vehicle on 29.11.2014 are all admitted facts.  The complainant stated that as per advice of Ops, she got the vehicle repaired at the ASC incurring a sum of Rs.2, 95,691/- and submitted all required papers before OP.1 but in spite of repeated approach, the Ops did not settle the claim.

5.                     The Ops stated that the complainant had used the vehicle as commercial purpose and as such her case is not maintainable under C.P. Act.  This contention of the Ops is not sustainable under law because as per settled principle of law, insurance policy taken by commercial organization or for commercial vehicle would not bring matter within commercial purpose.

6.                     The Ops stated that after obtaining documents the Surveyor assessed loss at Rs.2, 10,000/- but the complainant is demanding more.  It is seen that the surveyor has prepared his report on 20.3.2015 but not a single correspondence from the Ops is available intimating the complainant to receive the claim as assessed by the surveyor.  Rather, the complainant through her advocate has issued registered notice on 15.12.2015 requesting early settlement of her claim but the Ops failed to give any reply to that letter.  These activities of Ops certainly amount to deficiency in service.

7.                     It is seen that the Surveyor assessed the loss at Rs.2, 10,000/- and the Ops have filed survey report which is on record.  Surveyor’s report being an important document, it can not be brushed aside easily.  As the surveyor has assessed loss by taking all the conditions of the policy into consideration, we hold that the loss assessed by the surveyor is genuine.  Further it is seen that the Ops have not effected the payment in favour of the complainant and she has obtained the vehicle on loan from a bank.  Hence the awarded sum shall carry interest from the date of survey report as we have already hold that the Ops have committed deficiency in service by not intimating the fact of claim settlement on the basis of surveyor’s assessment.  As such  in our opinion, the Ops are to pay interest on the settled amount from 20.3.2015 (date of surveyor’s report).  In view of granting interest from the date of surveyor’s report, we are not inclined to grant any compensation in favour of the complainant.  Due to such inaction of the Ops, the complainant has come up with this case including some expenditure for which she is entitled for some costs which we assessed at Rs.5000/-.

8.                     Hence ordered that the complaint petition is allowed in part and the Ops being jointly and severally liable are directed to pay Rs.2, 10, 000/- towards insurance claim with interest @ 9% p.a. from 20.3.2015 and to pay Rs.5000/- towards cost to the complainant within 30 days from the date of communication of this order.

(to dict.)