ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. LALIT KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 9.5.2008 passed by Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Shimla (for short, 'State Commission') in Appeal No. 340/2006 whereby the State Commission partly allowed the appeal filed by the petitioner by partially modifying the order dated 20.9.2006 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mandi, H.P. (for short, 'District Forum') and settled the claim of the respondent/complainant on nonstandard basis, i.e., 75% of the claim allowed by the District Forum. The District Forum by its order dated 20.9.2006 allowed the complaint filed by the respondent/complainant by accepting the full claim by directing the petitioner Insurance Company to pay Rs. 1,68,000 with interest @ 9% per annum. There is delay of 10 days in filing of this revision petition for which the petitioner has filed an application for condoning the delay. For the reasons stated in the application, we condone the delay in question.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts which have led to filing of this revision petition are that the respondent/complainant insured his Tata Sumo (Maxi -cab) vehicle with the opposite party/petitioner vide a policy which was valid from 26.5.2005 to 25.5.2006. The said vehicle met with an accident on 13.11.2005. Complainant suffered serious injuries and the vehicle got damaged heavily resulting in total loss. At the time of accident the complainant was driving the vehicle and as per the allegation, he was holding driving licence for Light Motor Vehicle (Non -Transport) along with another licence, which was learner's Licence to drive Light Motor Vehicle (Transport). It was also stated in the complaint that one Devinder Singh, who had a licence to drive a Heavy Goods Vehicle, was seated with the complainant at the time of accident. The accident was reported to the local police and the Insurance Company. The complainant also lodged the claim for the damage caused to the vehicle along with necessary documents. The Insurance Company repudiated the claim on the ground that the insured vehicle, which is a passenger carrying commercial vehicle at the material time of accident, was being driven by a person, who was not holding a valid and effective driving licence to drive the category of vehicle insured. It was also stated by the opposite party/petitioner that at the time of accident the insured vehicle was carrying five passengers besides the driver, i.e., the owner himself. Repudiation of the claim led to filing of a consumer complaint by the complainant/respondent before the District Forum which allowed the complaint by directing the opposite party/Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs. 1,68,000 on account of OD claim and the complainant was directed to hand over the salvage of the vehicle as also the RC to the Insurance Company. Interest @ 9% per annum from the date of institution of the complaint till payment was also allowed along with litigation cost of Rs. 2,000.

(3.) Aggrieved of the order of the District Forum, the petitioner Insurance Company challenged it before the State Commission by filing its appeal, which was partly allowed by the State Commission by its impugned order as stated above.