SUGAN KUMAR JAIN Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is referred to this Full Bench (constituted by the President of the Commission) to resolve the conflicting views expressed by a Division Bench of this Commission while dealing with a claim of insured having national permit for his vehicle which was damaged in an accident during existence of the insurance coverage as also of the national permit but where year to year authorization for use of the vehicle in a particular State/Region had expired on the date of the accident.

(2.) IN Appeal No. 997/06, National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kesoram, decided on 25.11.2006, the Division Bench of the Commission was of the view that violation was too technical to repudiate the insured's claim and that the order passed by the District Forum directing settlement of claim on non -standard basis was justified. However in a latter decision in Appeal No. 542/2007, National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Smt. Sonila Lalchandani, rendered on 19.12.2007, the same Bench held that use of the vehicle after expiry of the authorization constituted breach of not only of the conditions of the policy, but also of law and that the Insurance Company was justified in repudiating insured's claim. Obviously decision in the case of Kesoram , was not brought to the notice of the Bench while hearing the Appeal No. 542/07.

(3.) WE have heard Mr. Shashank Pandey, learned Counsel for appellant -insured and Mr. O.K. Shriwastava, learned Counsel for respondent -Insurance Company. Section 2(31) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the "Act") defines the term 'permit' as under: