SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD vs DEVI SINGH

LEARNED counsel for the petitioner present. None is present for the respondents.

BOTH the fora below have decided the case against the petitioner, Shriram General Insurance Company Limited.

LEARNED counsel for the petitioner argued that the surveyor''s report should be given due weightage and in support thereof, he has filed an authority of the Supreme Court reported in Sikka Papers Limited vs. National Insurance Company Limited and Ors., 2009 7 SCC 777. Secondly, it is submitted that it is well settled that unless or until there are some reasons to discard the report of the surveyor, it has to be accepted. I have gone through para 7 of the State Commission''s order, which runs as follows: "7. Learned counsel for the complainant -Devi Singh has drawn our attention to the report of the surveyor dated July 10 -th, 2012 (Exhibit R -1) submitted by the surveyor appointed by opposite party and specifically column No. 13 of the report admitting the damage to various parts of the vehicle including chassis assy, Front hood, front grill, suspension parts, Front Grills, Front Glass and Cabin assy etc. but still the opposite party disallowed the payment for these items. A perusal of the report shows that the surveyor disallowed reimbursement to majority of parts without any reasons. The report even finds mention that the surveyor has neither allowed the replacement of major parts including the bumper etc. nor has even allowed the repair of those parts. Therefore, this Commission feels that the District Forum has rightly not given much importance to the report of the surveyor."

LEARNED counsel for the petitioner could not show that loss regarding chassis assy and Cabin assy was assessed by the surveyor. It must be borne in mind that the surveyor in his report, under the caption "all losses and damage" clearly, specifically and unequivocally mentions as under: "PARTICULARS OF LOSS/DAMAGE In pursuance to the instructions received from your good office for the survey and Assessment of loss to said accidental vehicle, we have inspected the same carefully arranging necessary photographs. The loss appeared to be in concurrence with the cause and nature of accident and the damages sustained by the insured vehicle are fresh in nature as Chassis Assy, Front hood, Front Grill, Suspension parts, Front Grill, Front glass, Cabin Assy etc."

However, the report does not mention about the above said two parts.

CONSEQUENTLY , the fora below rightly did not accept the report of the surveyor. The report of the surveyor is not sacrosanct. Therefore, it has to be rejected for the reasons mentioned by both the fora below.

THE revision petition is lame of strength and therefore, the same is hereby dismissed.