NEW DELHI: The Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has dismissed an appeal by Bajaj Allianz General Insurance, upholding an order that directs the company to pay Rs 20 lakh to a car owner whose BMW 5 Series was declared a total loss after an accident.The bench comprising members H.P.S. Mahal and Kiran Sibal upheld the district consumer commission order and held that the insurer’s forensic report cannot be relied uponWhat was the issueThe complainant, Gurlal Singh, insured his BMW 5 Series with Bajaj Allianz for an insured value of Rs 20 lakh, after paying a premium of Rs 40,574.As per the complaint, On 11 January 2022, while driving to Chandigarh, a stray animal came onto the road after which Singh applied braked suddenly, and a truck coming from behind hit his car. The impact pushed the vehicle off the road, where it hit an electricity pole. Singh informed the insurer on the same day.The insurer then sent its own surveyors to inspect the vehicle, and later got a forensic expert to reconstruct the accident. Based on this forensic report, the company repudiated the claim, saying the damage pattern on the car did not match the account of the accident given by the complainant.The complainant then approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Faridkot, which ruled in his favour in March 2023. The district commission ordered the insurer to pay the full insured value of Rs 20 lakh, plus Rs 5,000 for harassment and Rs 3,000 as litigation costs, once the complainant transferred ownership of the wrecked car to the company.However, the Bajaj Allianz challenged this order before the State Commission.What did the commission sayThe state commission rejected the insurer’s argument that the forensic report should have been trusted over the complainant’s version. It pointed out that the forensic expert had never actually seen the truck that hit the car, since it had fled the scene, and had only guessed its shape and size.The Commission also noted that trucks typically have bumper guards fitted low on the front, which was consistent with the damage found on the lower rear of Singh’s car — directly contradicting the expert’s claim that the damage didn’t match a truck collision.“It is an admitted fact that there were major damages present on the rear lower side of the insured vehicle,” the commission noted.It further relied on the insurer’s own investigator, who had personally visited the accident site and reported finding a broken milestone and car parts scattered near the electric pole, and who had spoken to a local resident, Paramjit Singh, who confirmed the accident.The bench held that this “is sufficient to establish that nothing has been misrepresented” by the car owner.“The appellant/OP just to defeat the rights of the respondent/complainant and to repudiate the genuine claim got prepared the report from said forensic expert, which cannot be relied upon as the same has been prepared after adopting hyper technical approach,” the commission further observed.Holding that there was no reason to interfere with the district commission’s order, the bench said, “we do not find merit in the present appeal,” and dismissed it.Bajaj Allianz, which had deposited Rs 10,04,000 while filing the appeal, will now have that amount transferred to the district commission for release to Singh.
