By.Smt. Beena. M, Member:-

            This is a complaint filed under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019.

            2.  Facts of the case in brief :-   The Complainant is the registered owner of autorikshaw bearing registration No.KL-24-D-7890.  The Complainant took a Future Secure Commercial Vehicle Policy of the Opposite Party No.1 on 06.01.2021 paying Rs.8,184/- as premium.  The period of insurance was from 06.01.2021 to 05.01.2022.  While going from Meenangadi to Panamaram, the autorikshaw met with an accident on 02.01.2022, at Kariampadi and the vehicle was damaged in the accident.  The Meenangadi Police registered a case U/s 279, 338 against the rider of the other vehicle involved in the said accident. Thereafter, the Complainant intimated the Opposite Parties regarding the accident and subsequently submitted the claim form for reimbursement of Rs.15,000/-  spent for the repair of the vehicle. On 22.06.2022, the Opposite Party No.1 sent a letter repudiating the claim on the ground that the Complainant was not having valid driving license on the date of accident.  The reason given for repudiating the claim is absolutely wrong.  It is respectfully submitted that the Complainant was holding a valid license to drive autorikshaw at the time of the accident. The Opposite Parties have repudiated the claim without any valid reason.  As per the terms of the policy, the Opposite Parties are legally bound to admit the Complainant’s claim.  But the Opposite Party No.1 has repudiated the genuine claim of the Complainant without any valid reason. The act and omission on the part of the Opposite Parties in not settling the claim of the Complainant would amount to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.  Due to the deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties, the Complainant has suffered loss, hardship, agony, and damage.  Hence, this complaint.

3. On getting summons, Opposite Parties appeared before the Commission and filed version.  The contents of version filed by Opposite Parties are as follows:-

It is submitted that the Complainant after completely understanding the terms and conditions of the Policy had submitted duly signed proposal form and offered to pay Rs.8,184/-, inclusive of tax as total premium amount.  The Opposite Party evaluated and processed the proposal form on the basis of information furnished by the Complainant and issued the policy for the vehicle.  The policy was effective from 06.01.2021 to 05.01.2022.  That, the investigator, inspected the Insured Vehicle primarily for damage and submitted his Investigation Report on 16.05.2022.  The Investigator stated in its report that the accident happened, because of two wheeler Registration No.KL-12-M-6689 had hit the Insured vehicle.  The Investigator’s report also disclosed that the Complainant’s driving license was expired at the time of accident. The Opposite Party scrutinized the claim form and the documents submitted by the Complainant along with the Investigator’s Report and came to hold that of a crucial fact that the vehicle was driven by the Complainant at the time of accident even though his driving license vide DL No. 11/270/1970 for transport category was expired on 07.08.2020 i.e., clearly more than two years before the date of accident. It is noteworthy to mention that the Complainant was driving the vehicle illegally without having a valid/renewed driving license.    Pertaining to the terms and conditions of the policy, which states that a driver must have a valid and effective driving license at the time of driving the Insured Vehicle was clearly breached by the Complainant by committing an illegal activity of driving a vehicle without a valid license.  The relevant clause of the policy is “Any person including insured provided that a person driving holds an effective driving license at the time of the accident and is not disqualified from holding or obtaining such a license, provided also that the person holding an effective learner’s license may also drive the vehicle when not used for the transport of the goods at the time of the accident and that such person satisfied the requirements of Rule 3 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989”. The repudiation of claim was intimated to the Complainant through RPAD Post vide Repudiation Letter dated 22.06.2022. The Complainant’s driving license was expired on 07.08.2020 clearly more than 1.5 years ago before the date of accident date, still he continued to drive the vehicle instead of getting his license renewed which is serious offence under section 181 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988.  A valid driving license is the primary condition of the instant policy which is mentioned in the policy schedule as well as policy’s terms and condition.  Since the insured vehicle was driven by the Complainant himself who is also the policy holder with an expired driving license since 07.08.2020, hence the Opposite Party repudiated the claim justifiably and therefore no cause of action arises against the Opposite Party.  The Opposite Party had discharged his liabilities and duties obligated towards Complainant.   In fact, the Complainant’s driving license was expired on 07.08.2020 clearly more than 1.5 years ago before the accident date, still he continued to drive the vehicle instead of getting his license renewed which is a serious offence under the Section 181 of Motor Vehicle Act 1988.  A valid driving license is the primary condition of the instant policy which is mentioned in the policy schedule as well as policy’s terms and condition, too.  Therefore the Opposite Party prays to dismiss the complaint with costs.

4.  The Complainant filed proof affidavit and was examined as PW1 and the documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A7.  The Opposite Parties submitted that they have no oral evidence. 

            5.  We have heard both sides and have carefully gone through the records of the case. 

6. Points for consideration are as follows:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Parties?
2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for the reliefs prayed for?

7.  Point No.1 and 2:  On perusal of the pleadings of the parties, it is revealed that there is no dispute between the parties that the vehicle of the Complainant was insured with the Opposite Parties and the accident had taken place, when the insurance policy issued by the Opposite Party in favor of the Complainant in force.  Here, the Opposite Party have mainly contested the claim of the Complainant on the ground that at the time of accident, the Complainant did not possess valid and effective driving license and as such the Opposite Parties are not liable to pay any compensation to the Complainant. 

            8.   In this case, the onus to prove that the Complainant did not possess driving license at the time of accident is on the Opposite Parties, but they have not led any evidence to prove this fact. The Opposite Parties did not investigate the matter regarding possession of the driving license by the Complainant. 

             9.  Admittedly the Opposite Parties issued policy in favor of the Complainant as per Ext.A1.   The Opposite Party repudiated the claim on the ground that the Complainant was not holding a valid license at the time of accident as per Ext.A2.  On perusal of the record of this case, it is revealed that the Opposite Party has produced no material to show that the Ext.A3, driving license of the Complainant produced by the Complainant was not valid.  A perusal of Ext.A3, driving license which is revealing that it is valid for LMV from 20.02.1970 to 07.04.2027.   That means Complainant was possessing valid driving license to drive his autorikshaw till 07.04.2027 at the time of this accident.   Moreover, the careful perusal of the policy shows that the policy was issued on 06.01.2021 to 05.01.2022 and even at that time, the driving license of Complainant expired on 07.08.2020 and the policy was issued on 06.01.2021.  This shows that the Opposite Party was not having any objection at the time of issuance of the policy regarding the expiry of the driving license and inspite of all these facts they issued the policy.  Although it is their prime duty to ascertain the validity of the license but they are claiming at this stage after accepting premium and issuing policy.  Once the Opposite Party has admitted the validity of the license at the time of issuance of the policy, then at this stage when the accident occurred they cannot repudiate the claim on the ground that the Complainant was not having valid and effective driving license at the time of accident.  Therefore, the repudiation of the claim made by the Opposite Party on the ground that the Complainant had no valid driving license is not justified. 

10.  As a result of our discussion, we conclude that the Opposite Party has not repudiated the claim of the Complainant on valid legal basis.  Therefore, the Opposite Party is held liable to indemnify the Complainant for the loss suffered by him in accident. The Complainant has filed the cash bill, Ext.A5 regarding the amount which he paid for the repair of the vehicle which is revealing the amount of Rs.15,000/-. 

In the result the complaint is partly allowed and the Opposite Party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) towards the expenses incurred for the repair of the vehicle along with 8% interest p.a. from the date of filing this complaint till payment to the Complainant within 30 days from the date of this order.  The Opposite Party shall also pay a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) as compensation and Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand Only) as cost of the proceedings. 

The above order shall comply within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which the Complainant is entitled to get 9% interest from the date of this order. 

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 8^th day of November 2024.

Date of Filing:- 27.07.2022.

PRESIDENT   : Sd/-

MEMBER       : Sd/-

APPENDIX.

Witness for the Complainant:-

PW1.              Raghavan Nair.                                                                   Driver.

Witness for the Opposite Parties:-

Nil.

Exhibits for the Complainant:

A1.                  Copy of Insurance Policy No.V7980928.

A2.                  Repudiation Letter.                                                            Dt:22.06.2022.

A3.                  Copy of Driving Licence.

A4.                  Copy of Driving Licence.

A5.                  Cash Bill.                                                                               Dt:06.06.2022.

A6.                  Receipt.                                                                                 Dt:05.07.2021.

A7.                  Provisional Appointment for Driving Skill test.          Dt: 07.04.2022.

Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:-

Nil.

PRESIDENT   :Sd/-

MEMBER       :Sd/-

/True Copy/

Sd/-

                                                                                             ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

                                                                                                  CDRC, WAYANAD.

Kv/-