UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SALEEMULLA KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed by the opposite party against which the Forum passed an order imposing liability.

(2.) The facts that led to filing this appeal are briefly as follows:

(3.) The complainant was the owner of Auto bearing NO.AP 15 V 1015 which was insured with the opposite party vide insurance policy bearing No.050801/31/02/03471 dated 16-7-2002. The complainant submitted that as usual he kept his auto in front of his house on the intervening night of 31-5-2003 and 1-6-2003 and found it missing. He came to know that some unknown offenders stole the auto and burnt it near Pooja Hospital of Karimnagar. Immediately the complainant lodged a complaint in Cr.No.186/2003 and informed the opposite party about the incident and lodged a claim along with copies of F.I.R. , report of Fire Officer, insurance policy etc., The surveyor of the opposite party visited the spot and advised the complainant to submit estimate of repairs. The complainant submitted estimate given by Garuda Motors, Kathirampur for Rs.66,170/- and also supplementary estimates of Rs.12,970/- and Rs.3,000/- but the opposite party had not settled the claim. The complainant therefore got issued a legal notice on 5-8-2003 for which the opposite party gave a reply stating that the matter would be settled subject to terms and conditions of the insurance policy and that the first surveyor caused delay and failed to discharge his duty. The complainant got issued another legal notice on 1-8-2003 and in response to the said notice, the opposite party appointed another surveyor, Venkateshwar Reddy, Warangal and he inspected the damaged vehicle in the absence of the complainant and submitted his report. Inspite of several requests the opposite party did not settle the claim or permit the complainant to proceed with the repairs but issued a letter dated 10-11-2003 that the complainant had not started the repairing work to the vehicle and therefore no consequential damages will be paid. It is the case of the complainant that the delay was on account of the opposite party postponing the matter and as the vehicle was kept idle he submitted that he could not pay the loan or give it on rent of Rs.300/- per day. Hence the complaint for a direction to the opposite party to pay the estimated value of the vehicle of Rs.1,00,000/- and also pay Rs9,000/- per month from the date of accident together with damages of Rs.5,000/- and costs.