SUV damaged beyond repairs, insurance firm told to pay Rs 58L

Dismissing an appeal, the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, has directed an insurance company to pay Rs 57.90 lakh to an owner of a damaged car with 6 per cent interest. It has also directed the firm to pay Rs 50,000 to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment and Rs 10,000 as costs of litigation.

The insurance company had challenged the order of the district commission, dated September 25, 2023, on the complaint of Rajesh Jain, partner of M/s Elnova Pharma.

Jain had approached the district commission after his SUV got damaged in an accident on February 25, 2020 and the insurance company opposed the claim.

He said he got its vehicle insured with New India Assurance Co. Ltd in 2019. The insured declared value (IDV) of the vehicle was Rs 92.68 lakh. Due to the accident the car was beyond repair and declared total loss. An FIR was also registered. Globe Toyota, Karnal, took the vehicle and intimation was also sent to insurance company on February 28, 2020. As per the insurance company requirements, he submitted all documents, after which a surveyor was appointed by the company. A dealer also prepared repair estimates of Rs 91.60 lakh.

On the other hand, the insurance company denied the allegations and said the complainant did not cooperate with the surveyor and in the absence of required cooperation, the surveyor was unable to assess the loss. The company said the complainant was himself responsible for the non-assessment of the claim, so it was not liable to pay the claim in the absence of surveyor report. Denying all other allegations and pleading no deficiency in service, it prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

After hearing the arguments the district commission had directed the company to pay Rs 57.90 lakh to the complainant with interest at 6 per cent p.a. from the date of filing of this complaint till payment is made.

Not satisfied with the decision, the insurance company challenged the order. But the state commission upheld the order of the commission and said the surveyor’s report was comprehensive and was conclusive on the aspect of identifying the actual loss caused to the vehicle. Therefore, the report of the surveyor is to be accepted along with that of an independent person who assessed the damage, it added.