ORDER (Per: Justice B.C. Kandpal, President): This is insurer’s appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 07.04.2012 passed by the District Forum, Udham Singh Nagar in consumer complaint No. 43 of 2009. By the order impugned, the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint and directed the appellant to settle the claim of the respondent within a month and to pay the claim amount to the respondent together with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the consumer complaint till payment. The appellant was further directed to pay sum of Rs. 5,000/- to the respondent towards mental and financial agony and Rs. 3,000/- towards litigation expenses. 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. UK06-J-7648. The said vehicle was insured with the appellant – ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited for the period from 18.11.2008 to 17.11.2009 at an IDV of Rs. 2,80,320/-. During the validity of the insurance policy, the insured vehicle met with an accident on 21.11.2008 near Moradabad. The FIR of the accident was lodged with the police and intimation was also given to the insurance company. The insurance company appointed surveyor for assessment of the loss, but the claim of the complainant was not settled by the insurance company. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the insurance company, the complainant filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Udham Singh Nagar. 3. The insurance company filed written statement before the District Forum and pleaded that the complainant did not submit the estimate of repairs of the vehicle; that the complainant also did not deposit the salvage of the vehicle with the insurance company; that the complainant did not complete the required formalities for settlement of the claim and, as such, his claim could not be processed and that there is no 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 07.04.2012 in the above manner. Aggrieved by the said order, the insurance company has filed the present appeal. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record. 6. There is no dispute regarding the insurance of the vehicle. Aggrieved by the said order, the insurance company has filed the present appeal. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record. 6. There is no dispute regarding the insurance of the vehicle. There is also no dispute with regard to the fact that during the validity of the insurance policy, the insured vehicle met with an accident and in the said accident, the vehicle was damaged. The perusal of the impugned order shows that the complainant has submitted an estimate of repairs issued by Ashish Automobiles to the tune of Rs. 2,89,007/-. As is stated above, the vehicle was insured at an IDV of Rs. 2,80,320/-, but the District Forum has wrongly mentioned that the IDV of the vehicle was to the tune of Rs. 2,30,320/-. Since the estimate of repairs submitted by the complainant is in excess of the IDV of the vehicle and hence it can safely be said that the present case is that of total loss of the vehicle and the complainant is entitled to compensation on total loss basis after deducting the value of the salvage from the IDV of the vehicle. 7. The vehicle was insured on 18.11.2008 and the same met with an accident on 21.11.2008, hence there is no question of any depreciation from the IDV of the vehicle, because the vehicle was used only for a period of three days from the date of its insurance on 18.11.2008 before it met with an accident on 21.11.2008. There is no report of the surveyor of the insurance company on record so as to determine value of the salvage. However, in our considered view, deduction @25% from the IDV of the vehicle is to be made towards the value of the salvage. This way, the value of the salvage comes to Rs. 70,080/- (25% of Rs. 2,80,320/-) and after deducting the said amount from the IDV of the vehicle, the complainant is to be held entitled to the remaining amount, which comes to Rs. 2,10,240/-. It was submitted on behalf of the insurance company that the vehicle was financed by the bank. Since the vehicle was financed by the bank and hence the complainant should submit the No Objection Certificate with the insurance company and thereafter the insurance company should pay the amount to the complainant. 2,10,240/-. It was submitted on behalf of the insurance company that the vehicle was financed by the bank. Since the vehicle was financed by the bank and hence the complainant should submit the No Objection Certificate with the insurance company and thereafter the insurance company should pay the amount to the complainant. The interest awarded by the District Forum @6% p.a. is perfectly justified and can not be said to be on the higher side. Since the complainant has been awarded interest, there is no question of separate compensation towards mental and financial agony and hence the amount of Rs. 5,000/- awarded by the District Forum towards mental and financial agony can not be said to be justified and is liable to be set aside. The litigation expenses of Rs. 3,000/- awarded by the District Forum are also perfectly justified. This way, the appeal succeeds partly and is to be allowed accordingly and the order impugned passed by the District Forum is to be modified as such. 8. For the reasons aforesaid, appeal is partly allowed. Order impugned dated 07.04.2012 passed by the District Forum is modified and the appellant is directed to pay compensation of Rs. 2,10,240/- (Rs. 2,80,320/- minus Rs. 70,080/-) to the respondent together with interest @6% p.a. from the date of filing of the consumer complaint till payment and Rs. 3,000/- towards litigation expenses awarded by the District Forum. The respondent shall submit the No Objection Certificate of the bank with the appellant within a period of one month and thereafter the appellant shall pay the award amount to the respondent. Costs of the appeal made easy.