J P GUPTA Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the appellant-plaintiff against dismissal of his suit.

(2.) Plaintiff filed a civil suit for recovery of Rs.1,40,547.05. Plaintiff had purchased a vehicle, Maruti van, bearing registration No. MO 07-1965. The said vehicle was insured between 23.3.1991 and 22.3.1992. On 5.5.1991 when the driver of the vehicle was taking the vehicle from Gwalior to Dabra, on the way two people asked for lift and he had given them lift up to the Hanuman Temple, Jourasi. At the temple, driver was offered 'prasad' and a Limca (cold drink). Thereafter driver fell unconscious and when he regained consciousness he found himself by the side of the road. He informed about the incident to the plaintiffs son on 7.5.1991 and the plaintiff was informed on 8.5.1991 by his son. The plaintiff returned from Indore on 9.5.1991 and lodged the F.I.R. on 10.5.1991 at the Police Station, Huzrat Kotwali, Gwalior. Plaintiff submitted the claim to defendant insurance company, but defendant did not satisfy the claim. Then dispute was raised before the District Consumer Redressal Forum but the application was dismissed and appeal before the State Commission was dismissed on 25.6.1994 as not maintainable. Thereafter, plaintiff filed a civil suit. The defendant denied the claim and submitted that the vehicle was insured for personal use. Defendant submitted that the vehicle was used for commercial purpose, therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled for any claim. The trial court after framing as many as seven issues dismissed the suit. Trial court held that though the vehicle was insured with the defendant but the vehicle was not used for domestic purpose but was being used for commercial purpose, therefore, the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation.

(3.) Only question involved in the appeal is whether in the case of theft of car, nature of the use of the vehicle is essential? It is not a case of third party risk. It is admitted that the vehicle is lost. It is also admitted that the vehicle was insured. Whether user of vehicle was for commercial purpose or private purpose is necessary to be determined in this case.