State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance ... vs Om Parkash on 10 April, 2026
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
HARYANA
FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/6/A/1246/2018
ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO.LTD.
PRESENT ADDRESS - II FLOOR, SUBRAMANIAM BUILDING CLUB HOUSE ROAD, CHENNAI.
,HARYANA.
.......Appellant(s)
Versus
OM PARKASH
PRESENT ADDRESS - VPO LAKHAN MAJRA TEHSIL MEHAM DISTT. ROHTAK. ,HARYANA.
.......Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
MR. S . P . SOOD , JUDICIAL MEMBER
MR. SURESH CHANDER KAUSHIK , MEMBER
FOR THE APPELLANT:
MR. SACHIN OHIR, COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT.
FOR THE RESPONDENT:
MR. AKASH JUNEJA, COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT.
DATED: 10/04/2026
ORDER
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA Date of Institution: 12.11.2018 Date of final hearing: 10.04.2026 Date of order: 10.04.2026 First Appeal No.1246 of 2018 IN THE MATTER OF:-
Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd., Corporate Claim Department, Vishranthi Melaram Tower, No. 2/39, Rajeev Gandhi Salai (OMR) Karapakka, Chennai and Unit No. 644-45/19, Civil Road, Opp. Service Club, Rohtak through its Mr. Omkar, Manager Legal, Royal Sundaram Alliance India Insurance, No. 1, II Floor, Subramaniam Building, Club House Road, Chennai.
...Appellant Versus Om Parkash S/o Sh. Sube Singh, R/o VPO Lakhan Majra, Tehsil Meham, District Rohtak.
.....Respondent
CORAM: SH. S.P. SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER.
SH. S.C. KAUSHIK, MEMBER.
Present:- Mr. Sachin Ohir, counsel for the appellant.
Mr. Akash Juneja, counsel for the respondent.
ORDER
PER: S.P. SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
In present appeal No.1246 of 2018; legality of order dated 06.08.2018 passed by learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak (In short "District Consumer Commission") in complaint case No.660 of 2017 has been assailed; vide which complainant's complaint has been allowed.
2. Factual Matrix: Complainant was the registered owner of vehicle No.HR15B- 6988, which was insured with OPs vide policy dated 22.10.2016. The IDV of said vehicle was Rs.4,02,878/-. Said vehicle met with an accident on 07.05.2017 and same was totally damaged. OPs appointed the surveyor to assess the loss caused to the said vehicle. Complainant lodged his claim and submitted all the documents with OP, but OPs have not disbursed his claim.
3. Upon notice, OPs raised their contest and submitted that on receipt of the claim intimation, OPs without any delay appointed an independent surveyor, who submitted his report showing the liability of Rs.3,36,300/-. Since the repair cost was more than the IDV, the claim was considered on Constructive Total Loss. For the said purpose, the wreck value was assessed based on the quotations received and net liability of the company comes to Rs.1,91,878/-. Complainant was duly communicated and was asked to submit the consent letter with other claim documents but complainant failed to do so. As per plea, there is no deficiency in service on their part.
4. Parties led their respective evidence. On analyzing the same; learned District Commission has allowed the complaint vide order dated 06.08.2018, which is as under:-
"In view of the above, complaint succeeds and we pass an award of IDV of vehicle i.e. Rs.402878/- (Rupees four lac two thousand eight hundred seventy eight only) favouring the complainant and against the OPs alongwith interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 20.11.2017 till its realisation and OPs shall pay Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision. However complainant shall hand over the salvage to the OPs and shall complete the required formalities regarding transfer of R.C. etc. in the name of company. The award money shall adjust the outstanding dues of the financer HDFC Bank of the vehicle and the remaining amount, if any, shall be paid to the complainant."
5. Feeling aggrieved; OP/Insurer has filed this appeal.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length.
7. Learned counsel for appellant/insurer has urged that as per nature and extent of damage the cost involved in restoring the claim was treated on total loss/salvage loss basis under the terms and conditions of the policy, as per which if the cost of repair is more than 75% of the IDV then the claim shall be treated on constructive total loss (CTL). Appellant sent the letter dated 28.08.2018 to the respondent/complainant to settle his claim to Rs.1,91,878/- and sign the documents but complainant failed to do so.
8. Learned counsel for the complainant/respondent has contended that the impugned order dated 06.08.2018 passed by learned District Commission does not warrant any interference. All facts have been dealt with by learned District Commission in proper legal perspective.
9. Admittedly, the said vehicle was insured with the appellant and during the currency of said insurance vehicle got damaged. The Insured Declared Value of the said vehicle was Rs.4,02,878/-. Complainant lodged his claim with the appellant and appellant decided to settle the claim on Constructive Total Loss as the repair cost of the said vehicle was more than the IDV. If the repair cost of the vehicle is more than the IDV value of the said vehicle then insurer has to settle the claim of the complainant by paying the IDV of the said vehicle to complainant. In wake of above discussion, this Commission is of the firm opinion that there is no fallacy, legal or factual has been committed by the learned District Commission while passing the impugned order dated 06.08.2018. This order is affirmed, maintained and upheld. Present appeal is hereby dismissed being devoid of merit.
10. Statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited by appellant at the time of filing of this appeal be disbursed to the respondent/complainant (Om Parkash), after due identification and verification as per rules.
11. Application(s) pending, if any stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment.
12. A copy of this judgment be provided to the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 1986/2019. The Judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.
13. File be consigned to record room.
10th April, 2026 S.C. Kaushik S.P. Sood
Member Judicial Member
Addl. Bench Addl. Bench
D.K.
..................
S . P . SOOD
JUDICIAL MEMBER
..................
SURESH CHANDER KAUSHIK
MEMBER