SACHIN BALACHANDRA SHAH Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is filed by the complainant against the order of the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dated 11.1.1996, dismissing his complaint. The facts given rise to this revision petition may be summarised as under :

(2.) THE petitioner got his Maruti Car insured with the opposite party for the period 15th April, 1991 to 15th April, 1992. It was a comprehensive policy. On 19th June, 1991, the complainant along with his family was proceeding from Jalna to Nashik. On Jalna -Aurangabad road, the car met with an accident. At that time, Dilip Sharma who was employed by the complainant as a driver, was driving the vehicle. The car was heavily damaged in the accident. On 20th June, 1991, the complainant contacted the Insurance Company and requested them to make survey of the damaged vehicle. The Insurance Company deputed its Surveyor for assessing the loss. Initially the damage was assessed at Rs. 54,945/ -, On reassessment, it was increased to Rs. 85,000/ -. The case of the complainant was that after the accident, the driver, Dilip Sharma, started exploiting the complainant. He started demanding some amount. But, the complainant did not yield to the unlawful demand of Dilip Sharma. Due to that, Dilip Sharma made a false representation to the Insurance Company that he was not actually driving the vehicle at the time of accident. The complainant complied with all the formalities as required by the opposite parties but the loss was not compensated. Instead, the Insurance Company decided to investigate the matter and appointed U.B. Desai as an Investigator. On 6.10.1992 the Insurance Company repudiated the claim for the reasons stated in the letter. The complainant approached the District Forum, Nashik for award of compensation.

(3.) THE claim was contested on behalf of the Insurance Company. In the written version, it was denied that at the time of the accident Dilip Sharma was driving the vehicle or that initially it assessed the damage at Rs. 54,145/ - and later on increased to Rs. 85,000/ -. The complainant had misused the licence of Dilip Sharma. As per the terms and conditions of the contract, a person who drives the vehicle must have a valid driving licence.