(1.) This appeal under Sec. 19 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is in challenge to the Order dtd. 26/2/2019 of the State Commission in complaint no. 20 of 2017.
(2.) We have heard the learned senior counsel for the appellant (the 'complainant') and the learned counsel for the respondent (the 'insurance co.'). We have also perused the record, including inter alia the State Commission's impugned Order dtd. 26/2/2019 and the memorandum of appeal.
(3.) Briefly, the complainant had insured the subject vehicle with the insurance co. for the period from 4/6/2016 to 3/6/2017 for an insured declared value of Rs.22,20,625.00. The premium was paid, the policy was valid. During the subsistence of the policy on 29/8/2016 the vehicle met with an accident falling into a river when the bridge over the river collapsed while the vehicle was crossing it. First information report was lodged with the police. The insurance co. was intimated. The complainant claimed that the vehicle was a total loss and asked for the insured declared value i.e. Rs.22,20,625.00 to be settled. The insurance co. did not settle the claim on ground that the complainant did not retrieve and shift the vehicle to a workshop to enable complete inspection of the vehicle after dismantling its parts. The State Commission vide its impugned Order directed the insurance co. to pay Rs.9,51,338.60p. to the complainant as per the loss assessed by its surveyor with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of institution of the complaint along with Rs.25,000.00 as compensation for mental agony and harassment and Rs.10,000.00 as cost of litigation. The complainant filed the present appeal seeking payment of the insured declared value of Rs.22,20,625.00 with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of expiry of two months of the accident i.e. from 29/10/2016 along with enhanced compensation for mental agony and harassment and cost of litigation.