First Appeal No. 1100 of 2012. Case: National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Tarsem Singh. Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Case NumberFirst Appeal No. 1100 of 2012
CounselFor Appellant: Mr. J.P. Nahar, Advocate and For Respondents: Mr. V.S. Manhas, Advocate
JudgesGurdev Singh, J. (President), Baldev Singh Sekhon and Surinder Pal Kaur, Members
IssueInsurance Act, 1938 - Section 64UM
Judgement DateFebruary 03, 2014
CourtPunjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission


Baldev Singh Sekhon, Member

  1. This appeal has been filed by the National Insurance Company, appellant on behalf of opposite parties against the order dated 13.7.2012 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Hoshiarpur (in short "District Forum"), vide which the complaint filed by the respondent/complainant was accepted and the opposite parties were directed to pay the claim amount of Rs. 6,32,427 to the complainant along with compensation of Rs. 20,000 for harassment and mental agony within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order, failing which this amount was to carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of issue of the order till realisation. The facts, as stated in the complaint, are that the complainant purchased a Hyundai, I-20 car on 11.8.2011 from Kosmo Automobiles, Showroom-cum-Workshop, opposite Delhi Public School, G.T. Road, Jalandhar. The said vehicle was insured with the opposite parties, vide policy No. 401011006384 that was valid for the period from 11.8.2011 to 10.8.2012. Unfortunately, the said car met with an accident on 12.8.2011 in which it was totally damaged. A DDR was got registered by the complainant regarding the accident on 12.8.2011 in Police Station, Mukerian. He also intimated opposite parties and lodged insurance claim of about Rs. 6,00,000 with them on account of total loss of the vehicle as the insured value of the vehicle was Rs. 6,32,427. The Surveyor, appointed by opposite party No. 1, assessed the loss to the vehicle. He completed all other formalities required by opposite party No. 1 but no claim was paid to him. A legal notice dated 15.10.2011 was also served upon opposite party No. 1 which was duly received by it. They sent a letter dated 28.11.2011 asking the complainant to dismantle the vehicle, however, he insisted upon the opposite parties, vide notice dated 15.12.2011, to consider it as a case of total loss and to pay the entire claim of Rs. 6,32,427 but the same was not passed. Hence he filed the complaint before the District Forum, seeking directions to the opposite parties to pay him the claim of Rs. 6,32,427 besides compensation of Rs. 25,000 on account of deficiency in service and harassment suffered by him.

  2. Upon notice, the opposite parties filed joint written reply admitting therein that the vehicle was duly insured with them and the same met with an accident on 12.8.2011. It was pleaded that that Surveyor, Sh. Kuldeep Sharma was appointed to investigate into the matter and to assess the loss caused to the vehicle, who reported that the vehicle had not suffered a total loss but it was...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT