NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. DAVENDER KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 8. 11. 2002 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Hisar whereby while accepting the complaint of the respondent-complainant directions have been given to the appellant-opposite party to pay Rs. 40,000 along with interest @ 15% per annum after three months of the lodging of the claim till its realization. In addition, Rs. 5,000 has been awarded as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant and Rs. 1,100 as cost of proceedings.

(2.) PUT shortly, the facts of the case are that the complainant is the owner of vehicle Tata-407 bearing Registration No. HR-39/2326 insured with the opposite party. On 23. 9. 1996 the said vehicle met with an accident near Narela-Delhi. Necessary intimation was given to the opposite party which appointed Shri Ashok Kumar, Surveyor, who visited the spot and submitted report to the opposite party. Thereafter, another surveyor was appointed who assessed the loss to the tune of Rs. 27,000. Grievance of the complainant is that he had spent Rs. 40,000 on the repair of the vehicle and had submitted necessary documents to the opposite party but the claim was repudiated on the ground that the driver of the vehicle was not having valid driving licence at the time of accident. It is under these circumstances the present complaint was filed wherein the complainant sought direction against the opposite party to pay Rs. 40,000 along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of accident till the date of realization and further to pay Rs. 10,000 as damages. The complaint was contested by the opposite parties. In the written statement filed it justified the repudiation of the claim after intimating to the complainant that it was a case of 'no Claim'. It was further explained in the written statement filed that the matter was got investigated through Shri Ashok Kumar and Shri Rajeev Gupta, Surveyors and Loss Assessors and also Mr. N. K. Pare, Advocate, Delhi, who was on the panel of the opposite parties. A report was received that the driver of the vehicle had no valid driving licence to drive Tata-407 and the complainant was accordingly informed vide letter dated 3. 7. 1997. Accordingly, it was prayed that the complaint merited dismissal. The District Forum found no substance in the stand of the opposite parties and issued the directions to the opposite parties as per order dated 8. 11. 2002 noticed above. It is against this order the present appeal has been filed by the opposite parties. Learned Counsel representing the parties have been heard at length.

(3.) AT the threshold of the arguments learned Counsel representing the appellant-opposite parties vehemently urged that the driving licence of driver Mahinder Singh submitted by the complainant was only valid for driving motorcycle, scooter, car, jeep and tractor and for that reason said Mahinder Singh was having no valid driving licence to drive Tata-407 which was a transport vehicle and this fact has been totally ignored by the District Forum and the order was liable to be set aside. Learned Counsel representing the respondent-complainant could not controvert the submissions made during the course of arguments. The insured had submitted the driving licence of Mahinder Singh bearing No. 22209/fbd authorizing him to drive motorcycle, scooter, car, jeep and tractor. The said driving licence will come under the category of LMV because light motor vehicle has been defined in Section 2 (21) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, "light Motor Vehicle means a transport vehicle or omnibus, the vehicle gross weight of either of which or a motor car or tractor or road roller the unladen weight of any of which does not exceed 6000 kgs. " No doubt the unladen weight of the vehicle was 2515 kgs. At the same time the specific provision of Section 3 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 cannot be ignored because it is stated therein, " (1) No person shall drive a motor vehicle in any public place unless he holds an effective driving licence issued to him authorizing him to drive the vehicle and no person shall so drive a transport vehicle [other than a motor car hired for his own use or rented under any scheme made under Sub-section (2) of Section 75] unless his driving licence specifically entitles him so to do. "