Haryana

StateCommission

A/338/2015

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

ANKUR KUMAR - Opp.Party(s)

B.S.TAUNQUE

17 Dec 2015

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

         

                                                         First Appeal No.338 of 2015

Date of Institution: 15.04.2015

                                                               Date of Decision: 17.12.2015

 

1.      National Insurance Company Limited, Regional Office-II, SCO No.337-340, Sector 35-B Chandigarh through its deputy Manager, (Legal).

2.      National Insurance Company Limited,  through its Branch manager, Jind.

…..Appellants

Versus

Ankur Kumar S/o Sh.Subhash Chander R/o
War No.11 Anaj Mandi Safidon, Tehsil Safidon, District Jind.

                                      …..Respondent

CORAM:             Mr. R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member.

          Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.                               

                                                                                               

Present:              Mr.B.S.Taunque, Advocate counsel for the appellants.

Mr.Vineet Dhanda, Advocate counsel for the respondent.

 

                                                   O R D E R

R.K.BISHNOI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

 

          As per complainant he got the car bearing registration No.HR 33 C 6088 insured  with the appellants-Opposite Parties (O.Ps.) and the policy was valid from 26.11.2012 to 25.11.2013.  On 19.04.2013 the car met with an accident and he spent Rs.1,07,000/- thereupon.  At the time of accident the car was being driven by complainant and his driving licence No.63684 dated 25.06.1999 was valid up to 09.09.2029, but, the claim was repudiated on the ground that the licence was valid up to 02.02.2004 only. 

2.      O.Ps. filed reply controverting his averments and alleged that during investigation  report was obtained from licensing Authority Tohana and it was told that licence was valid up to 19.09.2004 only.  The complainant was not having valid and effective driving licence on 19.04.2013 and that is why his claim was rightly repudiated.  Surveyor assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.91,151/-.  Objections about locus standi, maintainability of complaint, cause of action etc. were also raised and requested to dismiss the complaint.

3.      After hearing both the parties learned District forum granted compensation to the tune of Rs.91,151/- alongwith interest etc. vide impugned order dated 12.03.2015.

4.      Feeling aggrieved therefrom, appellants-O.Ps. have preferred this appeal.

5.      Arguments heard. File perused.

6.      The main question involved in the present dispute is whether the complainant, who was driving car, was having a valid and effective driving licence on 19.04.2013, when the car met with an accident or not.

7.      Learned counsel for the appellants-O.Ps. vehemently argued that the complainant submitted his licence No.63684, copy of which is Ex.C-2. Information was obtained from Licensing Authority, Tohana vide letter dated 30.04.2013 copy of which is Ex.OP-3.  As per this report the licence was issued on 15.06.1999 and was valid upto 19.09.2004.  During the pendency of matter before the district Forum complainant moved an application to summon the official of Licensing Authority, Tohana as a witness but the said request was declined and report was obtained from Licensing Authority about this license.  It was specifically mentioned in that report also that this licence was valid up to 19.09.2004.  In this way the complainant/driver of the car was not having valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident and is not entitled for compensation.  In support of his arguments he placed reliance upon the opinion of Hon’ble Supreme court expressed in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Prithvi Raj 1 (2008) CPJ 33 (SC).

8.      However there is no dispute          as far as opinion expressed by Hon’ble Supreme Court is concerned but appellant cannot derive any benefit from the same because the facts of the present case are altogether different.  From the perusal of licence Ex.C-2, it is clear that it was valid up to 09.09.2029.  Neither it is pleaded nor it is proved that this driving licence is fake or it is not bearing the signatures of Licensing Authority, Tohana.  Had it been proved that this licence is not bearing the signatures of Licensing Authority, Tohana then it would have been a different matter.  On the basis of report dated 30.04.2013 and subsequently on letter sent by the District Forum, it cannot be presumed that the complainant was aware that his licence was  valid upto 2004 only.  In the record the validity of the licence might have been shown up to 2004, but, the licence holder will go by the date mentioned in the licence.  How one can know that what date of validity has been shown in the record.  Had 02.04.2029 not been mentioned in this licence then it could have been a different matter. There was no chance for the complainant to apply for renewal of licence before the year 2029.  It has no where come on the file that the complainant was ever told before the accident that the validity of his licence up to the year 2004 only.

9.      More so, as per provisions contained in section 14 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 (In short M.V.Act”) the complainant might have presumed that his licence is valid up to 09.09;.2029 because as per section 14 the validity could be up to the age of 50 years.  For ready reference section 14 of M.V.Act is reproduced as under:-

14. Currency of licences to drive motor vehicles. 14. Currency of licences to drive motor vehicles.

(1) A learner's licence issued under this Act shall, subject to the other provisions of this Act, be effective for a period of six months from the date of issue of the licence.

 (2) A driving licence issued or renewed under this Act shall

 (a) in the case of a licence to drive a transport vehicle, be effective for a period of three years; 

[Provided that in the case of licence to drive a transport vehicle carrying goods of dangerous or hazardous nature be effective for a period of one year and renewal thereof shall be subject to the condition that the driver undergoes one day refresher course of the prescribed syllabus; and

(b) in the case of any other licence,

(i) if the person obtaining the licence, either originally or on renewal thereof, has not attained the age of fifty years on the date of issue or, as the case may be, renewal thereof

(A) be effective for a period of twenty years from the date of such issue or renewal; or

(B) until the date on which such person attains the age of fifty years.

 (ii) if the person referred to in sub-clause (i) has attained  the age of fifty years on the date of issue or, as the case may be, renewal thereof, be effective for a period of five years from the date of such issue or renewal:

Provided that every driving licence shall, notwithstanding its expiry under this sub-section, continue to be effective for a period of thirty days from such expiry.

10.    From this section it is clear that if a person has not attained the age of 50 years the licence will be valid for 20 years or until he attains the age of 50 years.  In the present case as per Ex.C-2 the date of birth of complainant is 10.09.1989. As per this date of birth he becomes 50 years old on 09.09.2029. In such circumstances it was but natural for him  to presume that his licence is valid upto 2029. A person of normal prudence is to go by the provisions contained in the Act and the date mentioned in the licence.  When both are corroborating  one will not go to find out of the date is mentioned in the record so these arguments are of no avail.

11.    In these circumstances it cannot be opined that complainant was not entitled for any compensation.  The findings of learned District Forum are well reasoned based on law and facts and cannot be disturbed.  Resultantly, appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed.

12.    The statutory amount of Rs.25000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellants against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

December 17th, 2015

Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri, Member, Addl.Bench

R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member Addl.Bench

S.K.