New India Assurance Co Ltd vs S P RAJENDRAN

-THE majority order passed by the District Forum, Erode in C. O. P. No. 24/2002 is under challenge before us. The matter relates to the damages payable by the Insurance Company to the complainant in respect of the vehicle insured with them.

THE case of the complainant was as follows : He owned a Tata Indica (DLX) car which was insured with the opposite party/appellant for Rs. 4,10,000 during the period 31. 1. 2001 to 30. 1. 2002. The car met with an accident on 6. 6. 2001. At the instance of the opposite party a licensed insurance surveyor and Loss Assessor inspected the vehicle at the spot of the accident and submitted a report on 8. 6. 2001. Thereafter the car was brought to Erode and left at Jayalakshmi Auto Works, Erode for repairs. An estimate of repairs was given by the said workshop for Rs. 4,86,603. 86. On receipt of the estimate another licensed Insurance Surveyor and Loss Assessor was deputed to inspect the car which he did on 25. 6. 2001 along with a Regional Automobile Engineer. He submitted a report dated 30. 7. 2001 assessing the loss on ''repair Basis'' at Rs. 1,73,469. 58, which included the labour charges of Rs. 43,400 and cost of replacement of parts at Rs. 1,28,569. 58. This assessment was accepted by the workshop and a letter of confirmation dated 27. 7. 2001 was issued by them for Rs. 43,000 towards labour charges and Rs. 1,28,569. 58 towards parts. The complainant not satisfied with the assessment of the Surveyor, caused a legal notice and insisted for payment of Rs. 4,75,000. The opposite party not having obliged, the complainant filed the complaint which was resisted by the opposite party. As already noted, two orders were passed by the District Forum, one by the President and the other by the two members. When the President in his order held that the complainant was entitled to be paid only Rs. 1,75,000 on repair basis together with transport charges of Rs. 1,500 by the opposite party, the Members passed an order on the basis of comprehensive insurance policy covering the vehicle at Rs. 4,10,000 and since according to them the car was fully damaged the claim should be considered on ''total loss basis''.

It is as against that the present appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company challenging the majority order.

IT is seen from the records that the complainant himself had accepted the position that the vehicle was capable of being repaired as otherwise he would have made a claim on total loss basis at the initial stage itself. It is further seen that a licensed Surveyor had inspected the vehicle and there was an agreement reached between the Surveyor and the repairer wherein the repairer agreed to replace the parts as listed in the approval letter and received Rs. 43,000 towards labour charges. The commitment by the repairer was also produced before the District Forum. The repairer had not suggested that the car was a total wreck and could not be repaired. In such a position, in our view, the majority members were in error in directing payment of Rs. 4,10,000 on a total loss basis. Under Section 64um of the Insurance Act, 1938, there must be a survey done in respect of claims over Rs. 25,000 and in the instant case the Surveyor had inspected and found that the vehicle could be repaired and fixed the quantum at Rs. 1,75,000 which included the labour charges as well. Nothing adverse had been attributed against the Surveyor''s report. It has been held by several decisions that the survey report which is a statutory report is entitled to utmost consideration and weight. We have already noted that the repairer himself had accepted the amount of Rs. 1,75,000 fixed by the Surveyor and had given his consent letter. In such a view of the matter, the order of the majority members cannot be sustained. Consequently, the appeal is allowed; the order of the majority members is set aside and the order of the President is upheld. There will be no order as to costs in the appeal. Appeal allowed.