STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION

BIHAR, PATNA

Appeal No. 255 of 2013

Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited, Ford Company Chauk, Purnea through its Regional Manager, National Insurance Company Limited, Regional Office, Sone Bhawan, Beerchand Patel Marg, Patna (Opposite party in the court below)

                                                                                                                                                                                  … Appellant

Versus

Amar Nath Keshri, Son of Sri Ramnath Keshri, Navratan Hata, PS- K.Hat, District- Purnea (Complainant in the court below)

                                                                                                                                                                            …. Respondent

Counsel for the Appellant: Adv. Sanjay Kumar Sharan & Adv. Abhay Kumar Sinha

Counsel for the Respondent: Adv.

Before,

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar, President

Mr. Ram Prawesh Das, Member

Dated 20.03.2023

As per Sanjay Kumar, President.

O r d e r

1. Present appeal has been filed on behalf of appellant/opposite party National Insurance Company Ltd. for setting aside the order dated 31.05.2013 passed by the District Consumer Redressal Forum, Purnea in Complainant Case no. 53 of 2010 whereby and whereunder the Ld. District Consumer Forum, Purnea has allowed the complaint case and directed appellant /opposite party to pay sum assured amount of Rs. 1,15,600/- for the loss/damage caused to vehicle.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case is that complainant had purchased a Piaggio Auto Rickshaw in the year 2007 for transporting passengers. The registrations certificate was provided by the District Transport Officer being registration no. BR-11E-2355 and the road permit was also issued by the Regional Transport Officer, Purnea for route from Purnea to Kasba (Up and down) and same was valid for the period from 06.06.2009 to 03.10.2009.
3. The vehicle of the complainant was insured for Rs. 1,15,000/- by the National Insurance Company for the period from 27.08.2008 to 26.08.2009.
4. While the vehicle of the complainant was being plied by driver Ganga Ram Mahto on 12.08.2009 a bus bearing registration no. 9198 dashed against the vehicle from back side in which the vehicle of complainant was damaged for which FIR was registered giving rise to Kasba PS case  no. 106 of 2009 dated 12.08.2009 under section 279, 337, 338, 304(A) of IPC.
5. The accidental vehicle was carried to Sonu Auto Garrage at Zero Mile, Gulabbagh for repair.
6. Complainant lodged a claim before the Insurance company for payment of insured amount for the loss suffered by the complainant due to accident of his vehicle but the claim was rejected by the insurance company vide letter dated 09.09.2010 on the ground that accident took place outside the jurisdiction covered by road permit, against which complainant filed a consumer complaint case before the District Consumer Forum in which notices were issued to the opposite parties.
7. National Insurance company appeared and filed its written statement stating therein that the claim was rightly repudiated as the vehicle of the complainant violated the terms & conditions of the insurance policy. Vehicle crossed its territorial limits of the permit which permitted plying of the vehicle from Purnea to Kasba while the said vehicle was plying on NH-57 at Radha Nagar where accident took place and same was willful violation of section 66 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and Bihar Motor Vehicle Rules, 1994.
8. The District Consumer Forum after hearing both the parties and considering the materials available on record held that on the date of accident the vehicle had insurance coverage and in the insurance policy there is no restriction about the route on which the vehicle has to be plied and route permit was obtained by the complainant much after insurance of the vehicle as such insurance company is liable to indemnify the complainant by paying the insured amount of Rs. 1,15,600/-, aggrieved by which National Insurance company has preferred this appeal.
9. It is submitted on behalf of counsel for the appellant that the vehicle was insured for the period from 27.08.2008 to 26.08.2009 and at the time of accident the vehicle had a route permit issued by Regional Transport Office, Purnea valid for the route from Purnea to Kasba (Up and down) vide permit no. 42/09 for the period from 06.06.2009 to 03.10.2009. Insurance policy is conditional and policy covers use of vehicle only under  a route permit. The vehicle was being driven outside its route permit which is violation of section 66 of the Motor Vehicle Act, which is a breach of terms & conditions of insurance policy as such insurance company had rightly repudiated the claim.
10. Inspite of valid service of notice non appeared for the complainant/respondent.
11. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in case of Amlendu Sahoo Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., (2010) 4SSC 536 and National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Nitin Khandelwal, (2008) 11 SCC 259, the insurance claim can not be denied in its entirety even if there is violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy including violation of route permit and such claim has to be settled on non standard basis.
12. Accordingly, the judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum is modified with a direction to the appellant/company to settle the claim of complainant on non standard basis (75%) and to pay the claim amount within 30 days with interest from the date of receipt/production of a copy of order passed by this Commission.
13. Appeal is partly allowed to the extend as indicated above.

(Ram Prawesh Das)                                                                                                                   (Sanjay Kumar,J)

       Member                                                                                                                                     President

Md. Fariduzzama