RAJENDRA KUMAR MOURYA Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 by the appellant/complainant having been aggrieved by the order dated 5.3.2008 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bilaspur (hereinafter called as "District Forum" in short) in Complaint Case No. 07/2007.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the complainant Rajendra Kumar Mourya had insured his vehicle having Registration No.CG -10/A -6227 with the O.P/Insurance Company (The Oriental Insurance Company, Bilaspur) for the period from 30.7.2006 to 29.7.2007 under Comprehensive Insurance Policy. In the complaint, it is averred that said vehicle was reported to have been driven by driver Ashok Kumar Banjara as per F.I.R., who had taken the vehicle to Bhatgaon on 21.7.2006 carrying fruits and having unloaded there, he was returning on 22.7.2006. At night 1.00 a.m. on 22.7.2006, the driver having driven vehicle fast and carelessly, dashed against a standing roller on road, as a result, the vehicle in question got damaged for which FIR was lodged. The complainant filed claim for Rs. 72,828 with O.P/Insurance Company towards repair which was refuted on plea that the driver, driving the vehicle at the time of accident, did not have valid licence. Therefore, the complainant filed complaint for Rs. 72,828 with interest 18% p.a. and cost Rs. 5,000. The complainant averred that the OP/Insurance Company had got the vehicle assessed for loss by Surveyor and also got the accident claim investigated by an Investigation Officer. The OP/Insurance Company in reply to claim intimated that the driver at the time of accident did not have proper and valid licence to drive the insured vehicle in question, such act violated the policy condition and therefore, the OP/Insurance Company had no liability to pay insurance 3 claim. Non -payment of claim by OP/Insurance Company was deficiency in service, hence the complaint.

(3.) THE OP/Insurance Company in their reply to the complaint averred that the driver Ashok Kumar did not have licence for commercial vehicle on the date of accident 22.7.2006. He was given "learning licence for heavy transport vehicle on 30.8.2006 more than a month after the date of accident. The OP/ Insurance Company denied that the loss claimed Rs. 69,228 was caused to vehicle by accident. The Insurance Company got the vehicle inspected by Shri B.K. Shrivastava, Govt. recognized Surveyor for loss, who assessed loss for Rs. 26,949. It is averred that the assessed loss by Surveyor is payable only when the papers related to vehicle are legal. Since the driver did not have licence to drive commercial vehicle, the loss Rs. 26,949 as assessed by Surveyor can not be indemnified, so claim was not paid. The Insurance Company did not commit any deficiency in service.