Surveyor report cannot be disregarded without cogent reasons; insurer's repudiation failed, and interest was awarded for delay.

An insurer may differ from a surveyor's report only for valid, recorded reasons, and cannot appoint successive surveyors as a routine measure to obtain a claim repudiation. The first survey report was not shown to be defective, so the repudiation based on later reports lacked justification and was not sustained. The compensation award was affirmed, and the claimant was also entitled to interest for delayed payment; interest was granted at 6% per annum from the date of filing until payment.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the insurer was justified in appointing successive surveyors and repudiating the claim without cogent reasons for not accepting the first survey report; (ii) Whether the complainant was entitled to interest on the amount found payable.

Issue (i): Whether the insurer was justified in appointing successive surveyors and repudiating the claim without cogent reasons for not accepting the first survey report.

Analysis: The statutory scheme governing surveyor reports permits the insurer to differ from a surveyor's assessment, but only for valid and recorded reasons. A second surveyor cannot be appointed as a matter of course or until a report favourable to the insurer is obtained. The first surveyor was appointed by the head office and the reasons advanced for disregarding that report were found to be unsustainable. The subsequent reports did not show inherent defects in the first assessment, and the record did not justify repeated appointments of surveyors to defeat the claim.

Conclusion: The insurer had no valid basis to ignore the first survey report or to repudiate the claim on that footing.

Issue (ii): Whether the complainant was entitled to interest on the amount found payable.

Analysis: The principal amount awarded by the Commission stood affirmed, but no interest had been granted on the sum adjudged due. In the circumstances, the absence of interest required correction so that the complainant was compensated for the delayed payment of the admitted liability.

Conclusion: The complainant was entitled to interest at 6% per annum on the awarded amount from the date of filing of the petition till payment.

Final Conclusion: The dismissal of the insurer's appeal was upheld, while the complainant's connected appeal succeeded to the limited extent of securing interest on the awarded compensation.

Ratio Decidendi: An insurer may appoint another surveyor only on the basis of valid, cogent reasons for rejecting the existing survey report, and repeated survey appointments cannot be used to secure a repudiation of the claim; where compensation is otherwise payable, interest may be awarded to address delayed payment.

---