AMRUTLAL LALLUBHAI Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant owned a truck bearing registration No. GRW 3499 which was insured with the opponent insurance company for Rs.2,50,000/-. The insurance policy was valid for the period from April 6, 1991 to April 5, 1992. The truck met with an accident on June 26, 1991. It is alleged that the truck turned turtle as a result of which it was damaged. According to the complainant, he spent Rs.61,287/- for repairing the truck. The opponent insurance company was informed about the above accident and the complainant filled in claim form for recovery of loss suffered by him. By letter dated February 7, 1992 complainant was called upon to furnish driver's licence and to state whether the salvage of the truck was delivered to the opponent insurance company's godown. The complainant complied with the request made by the opponent insurance company by the said letter. The opponent insurance company thereafter by its letter dated March 24, 1992 repudiated the claim made by the complainant on the ground that the driver of the truck did not possess valid and effective driving licence on the date if the accident. The complainant has, therefore, approached this Commission by way of this complaint claiming Rs.61,287/- for repair of the truck, Rs.40,000 /- as compensation for mental torture and Rs.5,000/- for cost.

(2.) The complaint is resisted by the opponent insurance company mainly on the ground that the complainant was not entitled to be indemnified inasmuch as the driver who was driving the truck at the time of accident was not holding valid and effective driving licence. It is submitted that the driving licence of the driver expired on January 14, 1991. It was renewed on February 27,1992 upto February 26,1995. Thus, according to the opponent insurance company, the driver of the truck did not have valid driving licence on the date of the accident which took place on June 26, 1991. So far as damage to the truck is concerned, it is submitted that the opponent insurance company has assessed the loss at Rs.33,839/-after considering the survey report and other papers of claim.

(3.) The facts stated above are not disputed. The only ground on which the opponent insurance company has disputed its liability to indemnify the complainant is that the driver who was driving the truck at the time of the accident did not possess valid and effective driving licence. Identical question had arisen for our consideration in New India Assurance Company Limited V/s. Amrabhai Mulabhai Rathod, Appeal No.303 of 1993 disposed of on August 25, 1994. Following the said decision, it must be held that since the driving licence was renewed the driver of the truck was possessing valid and effective driving licence on the date of the accident. As in the above case, in this case also, there is no evidence to hold that the complainant knew that the driver did not possess valid and effective driving licence on the date of the accident. In absence of such knowledge, the complainant could not be said to have committed breach of the relevant condition of the insurance policy as urged on behalf of the opponent insurance company. In our opinion, the opponent insurance company is liable to indemnify the complainant for the loss suffered by him as a result of the accident.