M.THANIKACHALAM, J. - (1.) The opposite party in CC.No.51/2008, on the file of District Forum, Thoothukudi, having suffered an adverse order dt.30.4.2010, has come before this commission, challenging the same, as unsustainable on various grounds.
(2.) The brief facts essential for the disposal of this appeal. The complainant/ respondent, being the owner of the vehicle bearing Regn. No.KA 05 AD 0999, had insured the vehicle, with the opposite party, which met with an accident on25.6.2007, casing severe damage, which was reported to the opposite party. The complainant spending a huge sum of RS.79,081/-, repaired the accident vehicle, which the opposite party is liable to reimburse, under the policy failed to do so, offering only a sum of Rs.3,78,000/-, which was declined by the complainant legitimately, causing mental agony also. Despite repeated request, submitting necessary documents, the opposite parties failed to settle the claim, and therefore, the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.7,90,801/-, in addition to Rs.10000/-, for mental agony and compensation of Rs.50000/-, totaling a sum of Rs.8,50,801/-. Hence the complaint.
(3.) The opposite party denying the averments in the complaint, admitting the insurance coverage, resisted the case, that the complainant failed to produce the amended permit for verification, and that is the reason for delay, which cannot be termed as deficiency, that after thorough investigation, the surveyor assessed the loss at Rs.3,78,000/-, for which a discharge voucher was sent to the complainant, but he refused to accept the same, for which the opposite parties cannot be held responsible, as if they have caused delay or failed to settle the claim, and in this view, since there was no deficiency, the claim itself is not maintainable, which is liable to be dismissed.;