State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
National Insurance Co. Through Its ... vs Kamal Singh Nehria S/O. Sh. Dina Nath on 19 May, 2026
H. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION SHIMLA.
First Appeal No. :SC/2/FA/105/2025
Date of Presentation : 01.05.2025
Order Reserved on : 05.05.2026
Date of Order :19.05.2026
_____
National Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office Dharamshala,
267, Civil Lines, Near KCC Bank, Head Office Dharamshala,
District Kangra, H.P., through its Branch Manager.
......Appellant/Opposite Party.
Versus
Sh. Kamal Singh Nehria S/o Sh. Dina Nath Nehria, VPO
Bhagsunag, Tehsil Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P.
......Respondent/Complainant.
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inder Singh Mehta, President
Hon'ble Ms. Yogita Dutta, Member.
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes.
For the Appe llant :Ms. Rajvinder Sandhu, Advocate.
For the Respondent :Mr. Harsh Kalta, Advocate.
Justice Inder Singh M ehta, President
ORDER
Instant appeal is arising out of the order dated 21.02.2025 passed by Learned District Consumer 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the order?
National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Kamal Singh Nehria.
(SC/2/FA/105/2025) Commission, Kangra at Dharamshala, in Consumer Complaint No.185/2024 titled Sh. Kamal Singh Nehria Versus National Insurance Company & Anr., whereby the complaint filed by the complainant was allowed.
Brief facts of Case:
2. Brief facts of the case are that complainant is registered owner of vehicle (Verna Hyundai Car) bearing registration No.HP-39B-5100 which was insured with the opposite party/insurance company for a sum of Rs.6,50,000/- w.e.f. 09.10.2022 to 08.10.2023. On 04.08.2023, the vehicle in question met with an accident and damaged totally. Intimation of accident was given to the insurance company. The complainant submitted his claim alongwith all the documents as per the requirement to the insurance company and requested many times to settle his claim, but in vain. Alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party/insurance company, the complainant has filed the present complaint. 2
National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Kamal Singh Nehria.
(SC/2/FA/105/2025)
3. The opposite party/insurance company filed reply and stated that on receiving the intimation of accident, the opposite party/insurance company appointed Er. Vishal Acharya, IRDA approved independent surveyor who inspected the vehicle in the workshop and submitted his report dated 15.09.2023. On receiving survey report, the insurance company recommended for settlement of claim on repair basis. The insurance company requested the complainant to send his consent for settlement of claim on repair basis vide letters dated 01.03.2024, 18.03.2024 and 27.03.2024, but the complainant instead of giving his consent has filed the present complaint. As such, the claim of the complainant could not be settled. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party/insurance company. A prayer for dismissal of complaint was made.
4. Thereafter, the parties led evidence in support of their respective pleadings.
3
National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Kamal Singh Nehria.
(SC/2/FA/105/2025)
5. After hearing the parties, learned District Commission allowed the complaint of the complainant.
6. Feeling aggrieved by the order of learned District Commission, the appellant/insurance company preferred the instant appeal before this Commission.
7. We have heard learned counsel of the respondent/complainant and also perused the written arguments filed on behalf of the appellant/insurance company and have gone through the record carefully.
8. Learned counsel of the respondent/complainant has submitted that the vehicle of the complainant was insured with the appellant/insurance company. The vehicle, in question, met with an accident and intimation of accident was also given to the insurance company. He has further submitted that surveyor has assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.4,93,876/- on repair basis which is more than 75% of IDV of the vehicle in question, therefore, the complainant is entitled for IDV of the vehicle in question on total loss basis 4 National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Kamal Singh Nehria.
(SC/2/FA/105/2025) and as such, the order passed by learned District Commission does not require any interference. He prays that appeal of the appellant/insurance company be dismissed. FINDINGS
9. The admitted fact emerging on record is that complainant is registered owner of vehicle (Verna Hyundai Car) bearing registration No.HP-39B-5100 which was insured with the opposite party/insurance company for a sum of Rs.6,50,000/- w.e.f. 09.10.2022 to 08.10.2023.
10. On 04.08.2023, the vehicle, in question, met with an accident and damaged totally. Intimation of accident was given to the insurance company. Insurance company appointed a surveyor who inspected the vehicle and assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.4,93,876/- on repair basis which exceeds 75% of the IDV of insured vehicle.
11. The appellant/insurance company has raised a contention that surveyor has assessed the loss at Rs.4,93,876/- on a repair basis. The insurance company 5 National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Kamal Singh Nehria.
(SC/2/FA/105/2025) recommended for settlement of loss on repair basis and the complainant had agreed to accept the sum of Rs.4,79,500/- as full and final settlement vide affidavit (Annexure C-6). Therefore, the complainant is only entitled to the aforesaid amount and not to the insured declared value of vehicle in question.
12. On the other hand, the respondent/complainant has alleged that initially he had agreed to settle the claim on repair basis vide affidavit (Annexure C-6), but the insurance company did not settle his claim despite repeated requests, therefore, he has filed the present complaint. It is further alleged that insured declared value of vehicle is Rs.6,50,000/- and loss assessed by the surveyor is Rs.4,93,876/- which exceeds 75% of the IDV (insured declared value) of the vehicle in question. Therefore, the vehicle in question is declared as total loss and the complainant is entitled for IDV of the vehicle in question and not the amount as assessed by the surveyor.
6
National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Kamal Singh Nehria.
(SC/2/FA/105/2025)
13. Though, the complainant had agreed to accept Rs.4,79,500/- vide consent affidavit (Annexure C-6) but said consent affidavit was not executed between the parties, as no agreed amount has ever been received by the complainant and this fact is clear from the reply of the insurance company, wherein, it is specifically stated that opposite party/insurance company requested the complainant to sent his consent for settlement of claim but the complainant instead of giving his consent had filed the present complaint.
14. Relevant portion of reply is reproduced as under:
"Accordingly the replying opposite party requested the complainant to send his consent for settlement of claim on repair basis vide letters dated 01/03/2024, 18/03/2024 and 27/03/2024 (Annexure OP-1/4 to Annexure OP-1/6). But the complainant instead of giving his consent had filed the present complaint prematurely."
15. It is crystal clear from the reply filed by the appellant/insurance company that the above said consent letter/affidavit was not executed between the parties. 7
National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Kamal Singh Nehria.
(SC/2/FA/105/2025) Therefore, this document is of no help to the case of the insurance company.
16. The survey report (Annexure OP-1/3) placed on record by the insurance company, itself indicates that the surveyor has assessed the loss on a repair basis at Rs.4,93,876/-, which exceeds 75% of the insured declared value (IDV) of the vehicle in question. Relevant portion of surveyor report is reproduced as under:
"The assessed loss on repair basis is Rs.4,93,876/- which exceeds 75% of the IDV of insured vehicle. So the case is fit for constructive Total Loss".
17. Since the surveyor, in his report (Annexure OP- 1/3) has specifically mentioned that the assessed value has exceeded 75% of IDV of insured vehicle, the vehicle of the complainant is declared as "Constructive Total Loss", therefore, the complainant is entitled for IDV of the vehicle, in question.
18. Another contention raised by the appellant/ insurance company is that learned District Commission has 8 National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Kamal Singh Nehria.
(SC/2/FA/105/2025) not passed any order regarding handing over salvage and key to the insurance company.
19. A perusal of the impugned order indicates that learned District Commission has allowed the complaint of the complainant and awarded Rs.6,50,000/- (i.e. insured declared value of the vehicle) to the complainant. However, no order has been passed regarding salvage of vehicle as well as cancellation of R/C. As such, the order passed by learned District Commission is required to be modified to that extent.
20. In view of the above discussion, appeal filed by the appellant/insurance company is partly allowed and the impugned order dated 21.02.2025 passed by learned District Commission is modified to the extent that the complainant is directed to get the R/C of the vehicle cancelled from the competent authority and thereafter, handover the salvage of the vehicle alongwith its key and cancelled R/C to the insurance company. Remaining order passed by learned District Commission remains upheld.
9
National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Kamal Singh Nehria.
(SC/2/FA/105/2025)
21. The parties are directed to comply the aforesaid order within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
22. Parties are left to bear their own costs.
23. A copy of the order be sent to each of the parties and their counsel free of cost, as per Rules. File of District Commission alongwith certified copy of order be sent back and file of State Commission be consigned to record room after due completion. Appeal is disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also disposed of.
Justice Inder Singh Mehta President Yogita Dutta Member Veena 10