By : SMT. SYEDA SHAHNUR ALI, MEMBER

            The case of the complainant is that he is owner of a truck bearing registration No. WB 29A 3502. Said truck was insured under the policy of the OP being No. OG-51-24222-1803-00000012 and was covered from the 00.00 am of 12.04.12 to Midnight of 11th April 2015. The said truck was driven by one Sk. Musaraf who has license to operate M/HMV car throughout India valid till 11.06.2016.  On 12.03.14 at about 11 am the said vehicle met with an accident at Pupunki Kewat Tola under Chass 9(M) police station Dist. Bokaro, Jharkhand and the truck was damaged badly and total repairing cost was Rs. Approximately Rs. 4,43,062/-. After the said accident the complainant reported the matter to the OP and submitted the claimon12.04.14. The surveyor of the OP Prasun Maity surveyed the said vehicle and took all the original documents and thereafter many correspondence have been made but in vain.  Lastly on 06.04.16 the complainant send demand notice to the OP by registered post  but the OP did not take any steps  for payment of the bill amount.

            In the above circumstances, the complainant has filed the instant case with the prayer made in the complaint petition.

           The OP Bazaz Allianz General Insurance Co.  has contested the complaint by filing written version. The OPs have denied all the material allegations of the complaint and has specifically averred that the repairing cost as claimed by the owner of the truck in question is excessive. This OP has contended that the driver of the vehicle was not having any driving license to drive heavy commercial vehicle and  the driver had been carrying two driving license one being DL No.WB 29200005353 and another being No. WB 2920130038734 which is in contravention of Sec 6 of the MV Act. The OP contended that there was no latches in service on the part of the OP. the OP has prayed for dismissal of the claim application. 

            The Point for Consideration in the case is whether the claimant is entitled to get the relief or reliefs as prayed for.

Decision with Reasons.

            The Opposite party Insurance Co. repudiated the claim on the ground that on the date of loss i.e on 12.04.14 the Driving License, hold  by the then driver Sk. Musaraf, since deceased being DL No. WB -20130038734 issued by the Licensing Authority, RTO Tamluk to drive LMV and LMV goods. As such at the material time of accident driver was not holding valid /effective license required to drive the class of vehicle insured with the Insurance Co and as registered. From the  policy issued by the O.P  Bazaz Alliance General Insurance Co. Ltd it is seen that the vehicle was of high deck load body for which the complainant paid premium of Rs. 36,200/-for the period from 12.04.14 to 11.04.15. At the point of time the vehicle met with the accident we find that the driver Sk. Musaraf was holding DL No. WB – 2920080053537 which entitled him to drive transport vehicle M/HMV (Regid chasis – goods) with effect from 19.02.2008 from which it is very clear that at the time of the accident/incident the driver Sk.Musarat was holding a valid license and according to said license he was capable of driving Heavy Motor goods vehicle. The information was sent to the Insurance Co. vide letter dated 29.04.15 and 25.11.15 by the complainant to one Sajal Guha of OP Bazaz Alliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. but the OP ignored and repudiated the claim of the complainant and did not take any initiative or steps to investigate into the correctness of the information provided by the complainant regarding the driving license which was the main ground of the OP to repudiate the claim.

            We have gone through all the documents filed by the complainant as also filed by the OP which go to show that Sk. Musaraf of Hatiberia, Haldia , Purba Medinipur held a valid DL  which was valid for driving LMV (Non-transport) LMV (Transport goods) (Regid. chassis – goods) w.e.f.19.02.2008. Therefore, the OP only to harass and defeat the genuine claim of the complainant took this defense in their written version.

           The OP Insurance Co. has filed photocopy of a DL in the name of Sk.Musaraf wherein the date of issue is shown as 12.06.13 and the class of vehicle which he was entitled to drive was LMV(Non-Transport) w.e.f. 12.06.13. There is no evidence to prove that the driver was holding the second license being No. WB 29291300888754 at the time of the accident. So, this plea of the OP is not accepted.

            In view of the above discussion the complainant is entitled toi get the loss suffered by her based on the documents filed by the complainant.

            Hence, it is

O R D E R E D

            That the complaint case being No 153 of 2016 be and the same is allowed on contest against the OPs.

The OPs are directed to pay a sum of Rs.4,43,062/- to the complainant within 40 days from the date of this order failing which the OP will be liable to pay interest at the rate of  9%  per annum from the date of filing of the complaint  till final payment. The  OPs. are also directed to pay Rs.20,000/-as  compensation and Rs. 5,000/-as litigation cost  to the complainant within one month from the date of this order, in default  the OPs will be liable to pay Rs. 200/- per diem as punitive charge which would be  payable to Consumer Welfare Fund.

          Let the copy of the judgment be supplied to all the parties free of costs.