RANJEET SINGH Vs. PERMANENT LOK ADALAT AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against the order dated 15.02.2016 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat (PUS), Sirsa (hereinafter referred to as the "Lok Adalat"), dismissing an application filed by the petitioner under Section 22 -C of Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act of 1987"), for settlement of dispute of Insurance Policy No.0100924327 and Claim No.620775590 set up by the petitioner.

(2.) In brief, the petitioner had purchased Mahindra and Mahindra Scorpio vehicle on 25.02.2014 bearing temporary registration No.HR99PM/2744. The vehicle was insured w.e.f. 14.02.2014 to 13.02.2015 by respondent No.2. The vehicle was alleged to have been stolen on the intervening night of 26/27.04.2014. The petitioner lodged a formal FIR No.427 dated 05.05.2014, under Section 379 IPC against the unknown person. Admittedly, the permanent registration No.HR -24P/5756 was obtained on 14.05.2014. The Lok Adalat dismissed the application of the petitioner on the ground that as per Section 43(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), the temporary registration of the vehicle is valid only for a period of one month and is not renewable, meaning thereby the owner of the vehicle has to obtain permanent registration number within a period of 30 days and according to Section 39 of the Act, no person can drive any motor vehicle in any public place or in any other place unless the vehicle is registered in accordance with the provisions of the Act and violation of the provisions of Section 39 of the Act is a fundamental breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy/contract. The Lok Adalat made the following observations in para 12 of its judgment in this regard: -

(3.) While interpreting the aforesaid provisions, the Supreme Court in the case of Narinder Singh vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd. and others, 2014(4) RCR (Civil) 272 held as under: -