LAWS(NCD)-2014-4-55

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. GULSHAN BHATIA

Decided On April 30, 2014
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Appellant
V/S
GULSHAN BHATIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 15.05.2012 passed by the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal No. 1066 of 2008 Gulshan Bhatia Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. by which, while allowing appeal, order of District Forum allowing complaint was modified and compensation was enhanced.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that complainant/respondent No. 1 got his Tata Indica insured with OP NO. 1/petitioner for Rs.2,80,000/- for a period of one year commencing from 18.10.2004 to 17.10.2005. Vehicle met with an accident on 13.6.2005 and Surveyor Sh. Arvind Koesis appointed by OP No. 1 conducted spot survey. Complainant got estimate of repair from OP No. 3, which was for Rs.2,94,412.70. OP No. 1 appointed Shri R.S. Kohli as surveyor to assess final loss to the car. OP No. 1 informed complainant that car was not repairable and he was asked to settle the claim on total loss basis. It was further submitted that car was financed by OP No. 2. As claim was not settled, complainant filed complaint before District Forum. Alleging deficiency on the part of OPs OPs resisted complaint and OP No. 1 submitted in written statement that Surveyor Shri R.S. Kohli assessed loss for Rs.75,811/- on repair basis. Complainant did not complete formalities; hence, claim could not be settled and prayed for dismissal of complaint. OP No. 2 admitted grant of loan and OP No. 3 submitted that rough estimate was prepared and prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District Forum after hearing both the parties allowed complaint and directed OP No. 1 to pay Rs.1,30,000/- against which, appeal filed by the complainant was allowed by learned State Commission vide impugned order and learned State Commission enhanced compensation from Rs.1,30,000/- to Rs.1,80,000/- against which, this revision petition has been filed.

(3.) Heard leaned Counsel for the parties and perused record.