ORDER Per: Justice B.C. Kandpal, President (Oral): This is insurer’s appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 27.04.2012 passed by the District Forum, Nainital in consumer complaint No. 78 of 2010. By the impugned order, the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint and directed the appellant – opposite party to pay compensation of Rs. 5,38,211/- to the respondent – complainant together with interest @6% p.a. pendente lite and future and Rs. 3,000/- towards litigation expenses. The District Forum has observed that the salvage of the vehicle shall be at the disposal of the appellant – insurance company. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case as mentioned in the consumer complaint, are that the complainant was the registered owner of vehicle No. UK04-G-7200 (Maruti Swift), which he had purchased after taking loan from Nainital Almora Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Motahaldu, Haldwani. The said vehicle was insured with the appellant – ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited for the period from 14.05.2009 to 13.05.2010 at an IDV of Rs. 5,65,806/-. On 10.02.2010, the sons of the complainant, namely, Sh. Rajendra Singh and Sh. Sanjay Singh, had gone to Lalkuan by the insured vehicle for attending a marriage ceremony. It is alleged that the car was being driven by Sh. Rajendra Singh. When they were coming back after attending the marriage ceremony, at about 11:00 p.m., the insured car met with an accident near Bari Padao, Haldwani. In the said accident, the vehicle was badly damaged and Sh. Sanjay Singh sustained grievous injuries and the driver Sh. Rajendra Singh also sustained minor injuries. The intimation of the accident was given to the insurance company, who appointed surveyor. On the instructions of the surveyor, the vehicle was toed from the accidental site. The complainant submitted the claim with the insurance company and completed all the formalities. However, his claim was repudiated by the insurance company vide letter dated 06.05.2010 on the ground of misrepresentation and concealment of facts. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the insurance company, the complainant filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Nainital. 3. The complainant submitted the claim with the insurance company and completed all the formalities. However, his claim was repudiated by the insurance company vide letter dated 06.05.2010 on the ground of misrepresentation and concealment of facts. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the insurance company, the complainant filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Nainital. 3. The insurance company filed written statement before the District Forum and pleaded that the consumer complaint is based on incorrect facts; that the claim of the complainant was rightly repudiated on the ground of misrepresentation and concealment of facts vide letter dated 06.05.2010 and that there has not been any deficiency in service on their part. 4. The District Forum, on an appreciation of the material on record, allowed the consumer complaint vide impugned order dated 27.04.2012 in the above terms. Aggrieved by the said order, the insurance company has filed this appeal. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record. 6. The insurance company has doubted the genuineness of the accident and has repudiated the claim on the ground of misrepresentation and concealment of facts. 7. The accident in question took place in the night of 10.02.2010 at about 11:00 p.m. On the receipt of intimation regarding the accident, the insurance company appointed A.K. Kapoor & Associates as investigator, who had submitted their report dated 17.03.2010 (Paper Nos. 18/1 to 18/6 of the original record). The investigator has not doubted the accident. The investigator has stated in the conclusion of the report that the claim is not payable because the driver was coming from a marriage party and smell was coming from him and that certain persons have stated that only one person was present in the car and the car dashed against a tree. There is no material on record to doubt the genuineness of the accident and to say that the claim lodged by the complainant is false and that the insured vehicle did not meet with any accident on the said date, i.e., 10.02.2010. It is true that there is some contradiction in the statements, but the same can not be taken to infer that the insured vehicle did not meet with any accident and that the claim lodged by the complainant is false. There is statement of one Sh. It is true that there is some contradiction in the statements, but the same can not be taken to infer that the insured vehicle did not meet with any accident and that the claim lodged by the complainant is false. There is statement of one Sh. Dayanand (Paper No. 18/12), who has stated that in the night of 10.02.2010 at about 11:00 p.m., one Maruti Swift car dashed against a tree and in the car, two persons were travelling, who were brothers and they were coming from marriage ceremony. In the said accident, the younger brother sustained grievous injuries and also sustained fracture in his leg and was taken to hospital by 108 Ambulance. Therefore, the factum of accident is duly established from the material on record and it can not be said that no accident took place on 10.02.2010 and the claim is not based on correct facts. Thus, the insurance company has definitely made deficiency in service by repudiating the claim of the complainant on the ground of misrepresentation and concealment of facts and the view to that effect taken by the District Forum is perfectly justified and does not require any interference. 8. So far as the quantum is concerned, the vehicle was insured for the period from 14.05.2009 to 13.05.2010 at an IDV of Rs. 5,65,806/-. The insurance company has appointed Sh. V.D. Joshi, surveyor and loss assessor, who has submitted his report dated 20.04.2010 to the insurance company (Paper Nos. 18/17 to 18/23). The surveyor has assessed the net loss at sum of Rs. 4,90,210.94/-, say, Rs. 4,90,211/- and the value of the salvage has been assessed at Rs. 48,000/-. The District Forum has added the value of salvage in the net loss assessed by the surveyor and by adding the said amount, worked out the compensation at Rs. 5,38,211/-. The District Forum held that the salvage of the vehicle shall be at the disposal of the insurance company. 9. It has been mentioned that the vehicle was purchased by the complainant after taking loan from Nainital Almora Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Motahaldu, Haldwani and the vehicle was hypothecated with the said bank, as is mentioned in the registration certificate of the vehicle (Paper No. 5/2). 9. It has been mentioned that the vehicle was purchased by the complainant after taking loan from Nainital Almora Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Motahaldu, Haldwani and the vehicle was hypothecated with the said bank, as is mentioned in the registration certificate of the vehicle (Paper No. 5/2). In the given circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the salvage of the vehicle shall remain with the complainant and the insurance company shall pay sum of Rs. 4,90,211/- as compensation to the complainant. However, if the complainant wants to hand over the salvage of the vehicle to the insurance company and the insurance company is ready to accept the same, then in such an eventuality, the insurance company shall pay compensation of Rs. 5,38,211/- to the complainant after the No Objection Certificate issued by the financier – bank is handed over by the complainant to the insurance company. 10. Vide order dated 22.05.2012 passed in the present appeal, this Commission had stayed the operation of the impugned judgment and order of the District Forum subject to the condition that the appellant shall deposit 50% of the awarded amount with the District Forum within a period of 30 days. In compliance of the order dated 22.05.2012 passed by this Commission, the appellant has deposited a sum of Rs. 2,70,605/- before the District Forum on 19.06.2012 vide cheque No. 122312 dated 12.06.2012. The said amount shall be released by the District Forum in favour of the complainant and the insurance company shall pay the remaining decretal amount to the complainant together with interest awarded by the District Forum. However, in the present facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the award of Rs. 3,000/- passed by the District Forum towards litigation expenses is not justified and is liable to be set aside. The interest awarded by the District Forum @6% p.a. is perfectly justified and can not be said to be on the higher side. Thus, the appeal succeed partly and is to be allowed accordingly. 11. In view of above, appeal is partly allowed. Order impugned dated 27.04.2012 passed by the District Forum is modified by setting aside the award of Rs. 3,000/- towards litigation expenses. If the salvage of the vehicle is retained by the complainant, then the appellant shall pay compensation of Rs. 11. In view of above, appeal is partly allowed. Order impugned dated 27.04.2012 passed by the District Forum is modified by setting aside the award of Rs. 3,000/- towards litigation expenses. If the salvage of the vehicle is retained by the complainant, then the appellant shall pay compensation of Rs. 4,90,211/- to the complainant together with interest awarded by the District Forum and in case the complainant is willing to return the salvage of the vehicle and the insurance company is ready to accept the same, then in that eventuality, the insurance company shall pay compensation of Rs. 5,38,211/- to the complainant after the No Objection Certificate issued by the financier – bank is handed over by the complainant to the insurance company. The amount of Rs. 2,70,605/- deposited by the appellant before the District Forum, shall be released by the District Forum in favour of the complainant and the insurance company shall pay the remaining amount to the complainant together with awarded interest after the No Objection Certificate issued by the financier – bank is submitted by the complainant with the insurance company. Costs of the appeal made easy.