R .S.MONGIA - (1.) Brief facts giving rise to this appeal at the behest of United India Insurance Company may be noticed.
(2.) THE respondent -complainant (here -inafter to be referred as the complainant) was the owner of Maruti -800 car bearing Registration No. CH -01 -Q -5976, which was purchased by him in January, 1997. The said vehicle was insured with the appellant Insurance Company in the sum of Rs. 1,30,000. The insurance policy was valid from 7.8.2001 to 6.8.2002. It may be mentioned that it is not disputed before us that while doing the insurance the vehicle was insured for Rs. 1,20,000 and Rs. 10,000 was for the electric accessories. The premium was charged for the price of the car as well as for the accessories as valued above. Unfortunately, the car was stolen on 13.5.2002 and intimation in that regard was sent to the Insurance Company on 15.5.2002. Along with that a copy of the F.I.R. No. 40, dated 13.5.2002 lodged with Police Station Kotwali, District Amritsar and the Registration Certificate were enclosed. The Insurance Company assessed the value of the vehicle on the basis of the report of the Surveyors at Rs. 85,000. The amount as claimed having not been paid by the Insurance Company, the complainant filed a complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Amritsar (hereinafter referred to as the 'District Forum'). The stand taken by the Insurance Company before the District Forum was that the Surveyor had assessed the value of the car at Rs. 85,000 and the Insurance Company was ready to pay 75% of the assessed value and the balance of 25% of that value would be paid on the completion of the formalities by the complainant, including the submission of untraced report. There is nothing on the record to show that the Insurance Company on its own sent the amount of 75% of the assessed value by way of cheque/bank draft or by other means to the complainant. The District Forum vide the impugned order dated 18.12.2004 allowed the complaint and the Insurance Company was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1,30,000, i.e. the insured value of the vehicle/accessories and Rs. 1000 as cost of litigation. Hence the present appeal by the Insurance Company. Learned Counsel for the appellant argued that the District Forum went wrong in awarding Rs. 1,30,000, i.e. the value of the insured vehicle, which included cost of accessories. In fact, what was payable to the complainant was the insured estimated value or the market value, whichever was less. Since in this case the market value of the vehicle had been got assessed by two Surveyors who had assessed the value at Rs. 85,000, it was that amount which was payable to the complainant.
(3.) ON the other hand, learned Counsel for the complainant argued that the Surveyor cannot assess the market value of a vehicle which has been stolen inasmuch as the vehicle is not before the Surveyor or the person who is evaluating its value. Further, it was submitted that perusal of the report of the Surveyors Exhibits R. 4 and R. 5 would go to show that nothing has been mentioned about the assessories for which insurance was also done and separate premium paid.;