KAMAL KUMAR Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the complainant, whose complaint has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 17.2.2006 by the District Forum, Sangrur. Brief facts relevant for disposal of this appeal may be noticed.

(2.) A Tata Sumo vehicle bearing No.PB-13-M-8628 owned by the complainant was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company (in short 'Insurance Company') on 6.4.2004 to 5.4 2005. Unfortunately, it met with an accident on 1.1.2005 while being driven by complainant's driver Hardev Singh. According to the complainant, the cost of repairs of the damage to the car due to accident was Rs. 33,995. However, the claim of the complainant/ appellant was repudiated by the Insurance Company on 16.5.2005, which led the complainant to file a complaint before the District Forum. Driver of the vehicle held a driving licence for driving car and scooter. As per the District Forum, since the seating capacity of a Tata Sumo is 10 persons it would fall in the definition of Transport Vehicle as defined under Section 2(47) of the Motor Vehicles Act. This conclusion was reached after noticing the definition of Light Motor Vehicle under Section 2(21) of the Motor Vehicles Act as also the definition of Private Service Vehicle as provided under Section 2(33) of the M.V. Act. Before we analyse the argument as also the approach of the District Forum, we may reproduce Sections 2 (21), 2(33) and 2(47) of the Motor Vehicles Act, which defines Light Motor Vehicle, Private Service Vehicle and Transport Vehicle respectively:

(3.) In the present case, it is not in dispute that the vehicle in question was being used as a private vehicle and was also insured as a private vehicle and not being plied as a transport vehicle for commercial purpose. It seems that the Insurance Company itself was in doubt whether a person holding a driving licence for car/jeep can drive a Tata Sumo, therefore, the Oriental Insurance Company had issued a circular dated 18.11.1997 clarifying this position. The said circular reads as under: