CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

MAHARASHTRA STATE, MUMBAI



FIRST APPEAL NO. 1346 OF 2008 Date of filing : 15/10/2008

IN CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 104 OF 2007 Date of order : 30/07/2009

DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM : NASHIK



Shri Anil Ramgopal Agrawal

R/at Sunil Towers, Deolali Naka,

New Bombay-Agra Road, Nashik. … Appellant/org. complainant

V/s.

The Divisional Manager

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Add. Plot No.26, Road A, M.I.D.C.

Satpur, Nashik. … Respondent/org. O.P.


Corum : Shri S.R. Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member
Mrs. S.P. Lale, Hon’ble Member

Present: Mr.K.B. Chandwadkar, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr.A.S. Vidyarthi, Advocate for the respondent.

- : ORDER :-
Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member

This appeal arises out of order/award dated 08/09/2008 passed in consumer complaint No.104/2007 Shri Anil Ramgopal Agrawal V/s. Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Nashik. Consequent to the accident of the vehicle belonging to the complainant, insurance claim was made. As per final assessment of the Surveyor, insurance claim was settled by the Insurance Company at Rs.42,840/- to which complainant did not agree and filed a consumer complaint. Said complaint stood dismissed by impugned order and feeling aggrieved thereby, org. complainant preferred this appeal.

We heard Mr.K.B. Chandwadkar, Advocate for the appellant/org. complainant and Mr.A.S. Vidyarthi, Advocate for the respondent/Insurance Company.

In the instant case, admittedly, vehicle belonging to the insured with the respondent/org. O.P. met with an accident on Nashik-Pune Road on 07/11/2004. Insurance Company on report, appointed Surveyor Mr.Vaibhav Kulkarni. Initially, Surveyor assessed the damages estimated at Rs.90,700/-. After alleged repairs were carried out, Surveyor found that bills submitted of purchase of spare parts were suspicious and instead of new and original spare parts, second hand old parts were fitted. Mentioning these circumstances, the Surveyor, as per his final report, assessed the payable claim at Rs.42,840/-. Respondent/Insurance Company accepted said report and offered Rs.42,840/- in settlement of the insurance claim to the appellant who did not accept it.

Even if repairs were carried out at the Garage owned by the appellant/complainant himself that itself may not be a suspicious circumstance. However, in the instant case, purchase of spare parts alleged to have been made from Kolhapur and not at Nashik. Bills submitted for verification were suspicious and these aspects were properly considered by the Forum below. Besides this, on reasonable grounds, the Surveyor when inspected the vehicle after repairs found that it was doubtful whether new spare parts were used. The parts fitted were repainted, camouflaging them. Suspicion properly raised by the Surveyor could not be satisfactorily removed by the insured offering satisfactory explanation. Under the circumstances, accepting the report of the Surveyor which cannot be branded as arbitrary, when the Insurance Company settled the insurance claim and offered that amount of Rs.42,840/- as per their letter dated 20/12/2005; no deficiency in service on the part of the Insurance Company could be alleged. Forum below rightly held so. We find no reason to take a different view than what has been taken by the Forum below. Thus, finding the appeal devoid of any substance, we pass the following order :-

-: ORDER :-

1. Appeal stands dismissed.

2. In the given circumstances, there is no order as to costs.

3. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.





(S. P. Lale) (S. R. Khanzode)

Member Presiding Judicial Member



dd.