ORDER : P.S. Rana, President 1. Present appeal is filed against order dated 10.04.2018 passed by learned DCF/DCC in consumer complaint No. 70/2016 titled Smt. Prem Lata v. United India Insurance Company Ltd. Brief facts of consumer complaint: 2. Smt. Prem Lata filed consumer complaint under Consumer Protection Act pleaded therein that complainant is registered owner of vehicle bearing registration No. HP-66A-0492. It is further pleaded that vehicle in question was insured with Insurance Company w.e.f. 19.10.2014 to 18.10.2015. It is further pleaded that on 30.09.2015 at about 5:15 PM when vehicle in question reached near Archandi District Kullu H.P. vehicle in question went out of road and fell down from road and rolled down about 200 (Two hundred) meters from road. It is further pleaded that vehicle in question was damaged. It is further pleaded that FIR was also registered in Police Station. It is further pleaded that Insurance claim was submitted before Insurance Company but Insurance Company repudiated claim and committed deficiency in service. Complainant sought relief for payment of Insured declared value of vehicle in question alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from the date of accident till actual payment. In addition complainant sought relief of compensation to the tune of Rs. 50000/- (Fifty thousand) for mental tensions and harassment. In addition complainant sought exemplary litigation costs. Prayer for acceptance of consumer complaint sought. 3. Per contra version filed on behalf of Insurance Company pleaded therein that driver of vehicle in question was not holding valid and effective driving licence. It is further pleaded that Insurance Company has repudiated Insurance claim as per laws on account of fundamental breach of terms and conditions of Insurance policy. It is further pleaded that Insurance Company has appointed Surveyor cum Loss Assessor and Surveyor-cum-Loss Assessor has assessed loss to the tune of Rs. 214500/- (Two lac fourteen thousand five hundred) on net of salvage basis with RC. It is further pleaded that Insurance Company did not commit any deficiency in service. Prayer for dismissal of consumer complaint sought. 4. Complainant filed rejoinder and reasserted allegations mentioned in consumer complaint. 5. Learned DCF/DCC allowed consumer complaint and ordered Insurance Company to pay Insurance claim to the tune of Rs. 214500/- (Two lac fourteen thousand five hundred) on net of salvage basis with RC to complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of institution of complaint till actual payment. 5. Learned DCF/DCC allowed consumer complaint and ordered Insurance Company to pay Insurance claim to the tune of Rs. 214500/- (Two lac fourteen thousand five hundred) on net of salvage basis with RC to complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of institution of complaint till actual payment. In addition Learned DCF/DCC further ordered that Insurance Company would pay compensation to complainant to the tune of Rs. 10000/- (Ten thousand) for harassment. In Addition Learned DCF/DCC further ordered that Insurance Company would pay litigation costs to the tune of Rs. 5000/- (Five thousand) to complainant. Feeling aggrieved against order passed by Learned DCF/DCC Insurance Company filed present appeal before State Commission. 6. We have heard learned Advocates appearing on behalf of parties and we have also perused entire record carefully. 7. Following points arise for determination in present appeal. 1. Whether appeal filed by Insurance Company is liable to be accepted as mentioned in memorandum of grounds of appeal and whether Insurance Company is under legal obligation to pay genuine Insurance claim? 2. Final order. Findings upon point No. 1 with reasons: 8. Complainant filed- affidavit in evidence. There is recital in affidavit that deponent is registered owner of vehicle bearing registration No. HP-66A-0492. There is further recital in affidavit that vehicle in question met with accident when Insurance policy was in operation. There is further recital in affidavit that vehicle in question was insured with Insurance Company at the time of accident. There is further recital in affidavit that vehicle in question was totally damaged in accident. There is further recital in affidavit that Insurance claim was submitted before Insurance Company but Insurance did not settle claim and committed deficiency in service and committed unfair trade practice. State Commission has carefully perused all annexures filed by complainant. 9. Insurance Company filed affidavit of Harish Branch Manager posted in United India Insurance Company Ltd. in evidence. There is further recital in affidavit that Insurance Company appointed Surveyor-cum-Loss Assessor and Surveyor-cum-Loss Assessor assessed loss to the rune of Rs. 214500/- (Two lac fourteen thousand five hundred) on net of salvage basis with RC. There is further recital in affidavit that driver of vehicle in question was holding LMV Non-transport licence at the time of accident. There is further recital in affidavit that vehicle in question was goods carriage vehicle. 214500/- (Two lac fourteen thousand five hundred) on net of salvage basis with RC. There is further recital in affidavit that driver of vehicle in question was holding LMV Non-transport licence at the time of accident. There is further recital in affidavit that vehicle in question was goods carriage vehicle. There is further recital in affidavit that driver of vehicle in question was not authorized to driver goods carriage vehicle. There is further recital in affidavit that complainant has committed breach of fundamental terms and conditions of Insurance policy. There is further recital in affidavit that Insurance Company has rightly repudiated Insurance claim on 22.11.2016 vide Annexure R-13 as per laws. State Commission has carefully perused all annexures filed by Insurance Company. 10. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Insurance Company that vehicle in question was light goods vehicle and driver of vehicle in question namely Duni Chand was holding LMV Non-transport driving licence at the time of accident and on this ground appeal filed by Insurance Company be allowed is decided accordingly. State Commission has carefully perused RC of vehicle in question. As per RC vehicle in question was light goods vehicle. As per section 2 (21) of Motor Vehicles Act 1988 LMV vehicle means a transport vehicle or omnibus unladen weight of which does not exceed 7500 kilograms. As per RC of vehicle in question unladen weight of vehicle in question has been shown 950 Kg. and laden weight of vehicle in question has been shown 1800 Kg. 11. It is well settled law that driver having LMV driving licence is competent to driver LMV transport vehicle. 2008(3) SCC 464 titled National Insurance Company v. Annappa Irappa Nesaria and others. As per Surveyor report driver of vehicle in question namely uni Chand was holding LMV driving licence issued by Licensing Authority Mandi H.P. which was operative w.e.f. 30.07.2013 to 29.07.2033. In. view of above stated facts and in view of ruling announced by Hon'ble Apex Court of India cited supra it is held that driver of vehicle in question was holding valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident. 12. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Insurance Company that learned DCF/DCC has granted excessive Insured declared value of vehicle in question to complainant and on this ground appeal filed by Insurance Company be allowed is decided accordingly. 12. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Insurance Company that learned DCF/DCC has granted excessive Insured declared value of vehicle in question to complainant and on this ground appeal filed by Insurance Company be allowed is decided accordingly. Insurance Company has appointed Surveyor-cum-Loss Assessor namely Sanjay Vaidya registered under Statutory Insurance Act 1938. Surveyor-cum-Loss Assessor namely Sanjay Vaidya has submitted report Annexure-2 dated 03.01.2017 placed on record. Surveyor-cum-Loss Assessor has recommended Insurance claim to the tune of Rs. 214500/- (Two lac fourteen thousand five hundred) on net of salvage basis with RC. As per laws net of salvage with RC means claim is settled on Total Loss basis and salvage is not taken over by Insurance Company but salvage amount as assessed by Surveyor is deducted from claim payment and possession of vehicle in question remains with the insured. 13. State Commission is of the opinion that Insurance Company could not be allowed to disbelieve report of Surveyor-cum-Loss Assessor appointed under section 64UM of Statutory Insurance Act 1938. It is well settled law that report of Surveyor-cum-Loss Assessor appointed under section 64UM of Statutory Insurance Act 1938 is substantial piece of evidence for settlement of Insurance claim and same should not be disbelieved unless contrary is proved against Surveyor-cum-Loss Assessor. See 2012(1) CPJ 420 NC titled H.C. Saxena v. New India Assurance Company Ltd. See 2012(4) CPJ 103 NC titled National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Jyothi Tobacco Traders. See 2009 (1) CPC 166 NC titled Pradeep Kumar v. National Insurance Company Ltd. See 2010 (1) CPC 696 NC titled Champa Lal Verma v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. See 2010 (3) CPJ 401 NC titled New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Pushpa Chhabra. 14. As per Surveyor report driver of vehicle in question died in accident and other two persons sustained injuries. State Commission is of the opinion that present Insurance claim is genuine claim and Insurance Company is under legal obligation to pay genuine Insurance claim to insured. See AIR 2017 SC 4836 (DB) titled Om Prakash v. Reliance General Insurance and another. See 2019 (1) CPR 471 NC titled ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Honest Bio-vet Pvt. Ltd. 15. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Insurance Company that learned DCF/DCC has granted excessive compensation to complainant to the tune of Rs. See AIR 2017 SC 4836 (DB) titled Om Prakash v. Reliance General Insurance and another. See 2019 (1) CPR 471 NC titled ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Honest Bio-vet Pvt. Ltd. 15. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Insurance Company that learned DCF/DCC has granted excessive compensation to complainant to the tune of Rs. 10000/- (Ten thousand) for harassment and on this ground appeal filed by Insurance Company be allowed is decided accordingly. State Commission is of the opinion that learned DCF/DCC has granted equitable compensation to complainant for harassment and it is not expedient in the ends of justice and on the principles of natural justice to interfere in compensation order passed by learned DCF/DCC relating to harassment. 16. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Insurance Company that learned DCF/DCC has granted excessive litigation costs to complainant to the tune of Rs. 5000/- (Five thousand) and on this ground appeal filed by Insurance Company be allowed is decided accordingly. State Commission is of the opinion that complainant has engaged Advocate before learned DCF/DCC and has paid Advocate fee and other- expenses and State Commission is of the opinion that learned DCF/DCC has granted equitable litigation costs to complainant and it is not expedient in the ends of justice and on the principles of natural justice to reduce litigation costs ordered by learned DCF/DCC. 17. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of complainant that order of learned DCF/DCC is in accordance with laws and in accordance with proved facts and same does not warrant any interference from State Commission is decided accordingly. State commission is of the opinion that order of learned DCF/DCC is strictly in accordance with laws and in accordance with proved facts and same does not warrant any interference from State Commission. Point No. 1 is decided accordingly. Point No. 2: Final Order 18. In view of findings upon point No. 1 above appeal filed by Insurance Company is dismissed. Order of learned DCF/DCC is affirmed. Parties are left to bear their own litigation costs before State Commission. Surveyor report submitted by Surveyor cum Loss Assessor namely Sanjay Vaidya under section 64UM of Statutory Insurance Act 1938 Annexure-2 dated 03.01.2017 shall form part and parcel of order. Insurance Company shall comply order within one month after receipt of certified copy of order. 19. Parties are left to bear their own litigation costs before State Commission. Surveyor report submitted by Surveyor cum Loss Assessor namely Sanjay Vaidya under section 64UM of Statutory Insurance Act 1938 Annexure-2 dated 03.01.2017 shall form part and parcel of order. Insurance Company shall comply order within one month after receipt of certified copy of order. 19. Certified copy of order be transmitted to parties forthwith free of costs strictly as per rules. Certified copy of order be sent to Learned DCF/DCC forthwith for information and file of State Commission be consigned to record room after due completion forthwith. Functioning of State Commission remained non-operative during winter vacation w.e.f. 11.01.2020 to 23.02.2020 and functioning of State Commission also remained non-operative w.e.f. 24.03.2020 to 15.04.2020 due to Nationwide lock down on account of Corona virus. Hence present appeal is disposed of today. F.A. No. 311/2018 is disposed of. Pending application(s) if any also disposed of.