Adv. For the Complainant: - Sri S.Bagarty
Adv. For O.Ps :- Sri P.K.Tripathy
Date of filing of the Case :-07.01.2021
Date of Order :- 24.03.2023
JUDGMENT
The Fact of the case in narrow compass-
(1) The complainant is the owner of Maruti Alto-800 Car vide Registration No. OD-15-G-5438 for his personal use. The vehicle was insured with united India Insurance Co Ltd. Vide policy No. 22300031200160023093 who is OP in this case. The policy was Valid from 21.01.2020 to 20/01/2021 for which the complainant paid a premium of Rs.5,020/- on dated 26.08.2020 at about 06.30 P.M when the complainant going to Sonepur from Bolangir the vehicle met with an accident as such the front Bumpher got damaged. The complainant informed the matter to the OP and lodged a claim before the Branch Manager, Bolangir Branch on dt 29/08/2020 along with necessary documents. Including the Job Card –Tax invoice given by Odyssey Motors (p) Ltd. Bolangir which bill an amount of Rs.23,900/- without proper verification the OP. has settled the claim unilaterally
-2-
and without informing the complainant transfer an amount of Rs.5,038/- through NEFT on dt 19.11.2020 which is very low in comparison to the expenditure incurred in repairing . Hence this case.
(2) To substantiate his case the complainant relies on the following documents.
(1) Copy of the insurance policy certificate dt.20/01/2020.
(2) Copy of the claim form filed on dt . 29.08.2020 .
(3) Copy of Job card Tax invoice issued by Odyssey Motors Pvt Ltd. dt.25.09.2020 .
(4) Money receipts issued by Odyssey Motors Pvt Ltd. dt 25/09/2020.
(3) Heard the complainant having gone through the complainant it’s accompanied documents and on hearing the complainant primafacie it seemed to be a genuine case hence admitted and notice to the OP was served and in response the OP. appeared through his councel and filed the written version.
(4) The rival contention on the other denied the allegation and stated the Op. confirm the payment after the assessment report of the surveyor namely Er. Kawaljeet Singh’s report vide No.F-20098/MVF/20- 21 dt 26.09.2020 which amounts to Rs. 5038/- as such the Op has not committed any deficiency of service on his part. The Op is not liable to pay any more compensation . The advocate for the OP filed one surveyor report again on dt.22.02.2023 which is on the record of the same surveyor and the same date i.e. 26.09.2020. Heard the complainant and perused the materials on record with submission and vehement denials of the learned advocate for the Op with arguments.
To meet the ends of the Justice the issues are framed below
(1) Whether the quantum settled by the insurer is fair or unfair
(2) Whether the OP taking the hot and cold in the same time i.e. the report stated in the w. version and surveyor report filed separately is differ.
(3) Is the complainant entitled for exact and proper compensation.
(5) From the above facts and circumstances after carefully gone through the record this commission founds and observes that the complainant is the owner of the vehicle being registered with R.T.O Sambalpur vide registration No. OD-15-G-5938, made the insurance policy with united India insurance co Ltd. vide policy No. 22300031200160023903 which was valid from 21/01/2020 to 20/01/2021 , even if there was NO F.I.R found on the record but the accident of the vehicle is confirm from the written version . of the Op in Para 5 on payment of Rs.5038/- .
(6) Here the core question is the claim money payable by the OP i.e. the quantum of compensation without proper verification and without the knowledge of the complainant.
-3-
The evidence on the record shows that in written version the Op stated the surveyor assessment by Er. Kawaljeet Singh’s on dt. 26.09.2020 shows Rs.5038/Net but on dated 22.02.2023 the OP filed another surveyor report of the same date by the same surveyor shows Rs.11,6000/- and the Odyssey Motors Pvt Ltd . Issue a tax invoice of Rs.23,9000/- who is also a recommended service provider for repairing and servicing . As such this commission feels some ambiguity on the assessment report prepared by Er. Kawaljeet Singh’s the surveyor who mistakenly left the item of painting which is meant for scratch which also comes under the coverage of the policy. Before concluding the matter we have jump to look over to denting and painting what it is ?
Denting means a small hallow mark on the surface of something caused by pressure or by hit.
A true dent is a type of damage done to a vehicle that covers more surface area than a ding would. Dents generally involves paints and /or mental damage are more unsightly than dings.
Denting and painting is of two components one is removing dents. Scratches on the vehicle external body are removed and re-made to look like how it looks before deformation. Second followed by painting the body with the nearest matching point A dent in the body of a vehicle can damage the integrity of the paint work, for starters in addition what begins as a barely there dent can later lead to flaking , peeling paint that exposes the vehicle body to the elements which means rust and corrosion.
Deeper scratches might indicate the clear coat has been compromised and the panel will most likely require repairing if you see bare metal or primer you can safely assume both the clear coat and the color have been damaged . So any scratch also need painting .Hence issue No. 1 and 2 meet for just decision of the case. to need the issue No.3 .
(7) Here in the instant case the Odyssey Motors in his job card Retail-tax invoice on the part of the labor component item.
No.1 panel quarter outer RH denting Rs.600/-
No.2 Panel quarter RH Painting Rs.2,710/-
No.4 Panel front fender RH Painting Rs.2,710/-
Item No.6 Panel front fender Ltd Painting Rs.2,710/- total comes to Rs.8,730/- which is left by the surveyor. May it be exaggerated by the complainant but the surveyor report is not the final report for assessment of the loss. It is just a scale of assessment on awarding compensation . As such this commission feels that a sum of Rs.16,038/- is proper for the loss sustained by the complainant less Rs.5,038/- already received.
As such the act done by the OP is unreasonable which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. perused the material on record interalia the evidence on record and gave our thoughtful consideration in favour of the complainant. Hence Order.
-4-
ORDER
The OP ( United India Insurance Co Ltd) is directed to pay a sum of Rs.11,000/@9% interest P.A from the date incident and Rs.15,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.4,000/-towards litigation expenses with in one month from the date of order failing which the entire amount should be paid by the OP @12% interest P.A. from the date of filing the case till realization.
No award as to cost.
PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION TODAY i.e DATED 24TH DAY OFMARCH’2023.
Sd/- Sd/-
(J.MISHRA) (R.K.TRIPATHY)
MEMBER. PRESIDENT(I/C)
