NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. R. SUBRAMANIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner/Opposite Party being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 13.12.2013, passed by the Tamilnadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Madurai Bench (for short, 'State Commission') has filed the present revision petition under Section 21(b) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short,'Act')

(2.) Brief facts are that Respondent/ Complainant had insured his Omni bus No. TN-72-AH-7426 with the petitioner. On 10.10.2011, the vehicle met with an accident near Vikrawandi tollgate and was badly damaged. Respondent intimated about the accident to the petitioner in time. However, petitioner did not settle the legitimate claim of the respondent, which amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. Accordingly, respondent filed a consumer complaint praying for direction to the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 3,29,195 towards the claim amount for repairing the vehicle and to pay a sum of Rs. 3,00,000 as compensation for mental agony and sufferings and also to pay costs.

(3.) As per written statement of the petitioner their defence is, that on receiving the intimation from the respondent, they appointed a surveyor/loss assessor to inspect vehicle, who assessed loss at Rs. 1,14,555. But, respondent was not willing to accept the amount as assessed by the surveyor. The respondent submitted a representation to consider the claim reasonably. At his request, petitioner appointed another surveyor/loss assessor for 2nd opinion. The 2nd surveyor assessed the loss at Rs. 1,30,230. But the respondent was not satisfied with the claim amount sanctioned. Therefore, there is no unfair trade practice or deficiency in service on the part of the petitioner.