ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. HAZI NOOR MOHAMMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the Petitioner against the order dated 31.01.2014 passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jaipur (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal No. 1833/2010­ Hazi Noor Mohammad Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Jaipur by which, Appeal was allowed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that Complainant/Respondent obtained an insurance policy for his vehicle, a Mahindra-Pick-Up bearing registration No. RJ-26-G-628 for a period from 15.06.2006 to 14.06.2007 from the Opposite Party/Petitioner, Oriental Insurance Company (hereinafter referred to as "the Insurance Company"). A truck hit the aforesaid pick-up on 17.07.2006, while it was being driven by Ikram Mohammad from Niwai to Jaipur and was badly damaged. An FIR No. 196/2006 was lodged on the same day with the Shivdaspura police station and the Insurance Company was also informed. K.S. Motors, the authorised service center estimated the loss to the extent of Rs.4,37,702.33/-. The Insurance Company appointed a Surveyor, who also recommended to settle the claim of the complainant, but the claim of the complainant was repudiated by the Insurance Company on the ground that the driver of the pick-up did not possess a valid driving licence to drive "Light Transport Vehicle". Alleging deficiency on the part of opposite party, complainant filed complaint before District Forum. Opposite Party resisted complaint and submitted that vehicle was insured as "Goods carrying commercial vehicle" whereas at the time of accident vehicle was being used for carrying 8 passengers besides driver, which amounted to violation of terms and conditions of Policy. It was further submitted that driver of the vehicle was possessing licence for driving light motor vehicle and learning licence of transport vehicle and he was not authorised to drive the vehicle unless he had besides him a person duly licensed to drive the vehicle, which amounted to violation of terms and conditions of Policy and Opposite party has not committed any deficiency in repudiating claim and prayed for dismissal of complaint.

(3.) Learned District Forum, after hearing both the parties, dismissed complaint. Appeal filed by complainant was allowed by learned State Commission vide impugned order and Opposite Party was directed to pay Rs.3,28,276/- with 9% p.a. interest alongwith Rs. 25,000/- as compensation and cost of proceedings, against which this Revision Petition has been filed.