BEFORE THE A.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: ATHYDERABAD.
F.A.No.722/2011 against C.C.No.134/2010 District Forum, Ranga Reddy District
Between
1. The Manager, M/s.ICICI Lombard
GBRTowers, 3rd
Hyderabad.
2. The Manager, M/s.ICICI Lombard General
M.V.ChalapatiTowers,
Govt.Hospital, Mahaboobnagar.
And
Md.Zulfikher Ali S/o.Mohd.Ali
Age 40 years, Occ:Owner of DCM Eicher
No.AP 22 W 2561, R/o.5-22/4/A,
NTR Nagar, R.R.District.
Counsel for the Appellants
Counsel for the Respondent
QUORUM:
AND
SRI S.BHUJANGA RAO, HON’BLE MEMBER.
WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY,
TWO THOUSAND THIRTEEN
Order (Per Smt.M.Shreesha, Hon’ble Incharge President)
***
BangaloreVisakhapatnam engaged by one Akash Road Lines in Rajendranagar for Rs.50,000/- per month since 4 months and as the vehicle was under accidental repair’s for a period of 5 months, he lost business worth Rs.2,50,000/-. The complainant on 16-1-2010 issued a notice for payment of the amount to the opposite party and they received the notice but did not settle the amount and therefore the complainant spent huge amounts for repairs by borrowing money at high rates of interest. Hence the complaint for a direction to the opposite party to pay Rs.5,00,000/- to the complainant towards the damages of the vehicle and loss of business and compensation costs etc.,
Opposite parties submitted that on the same day, the surveyor visited the garage where the vehicle was kept for repairs and assessed the net loss at Rs.1,87,100/- and also observed that the driver was not holding a valid driving license at the time of accident. Thereafter the opposite parties submit that the load carried by the complainant’s vehicle falls under dangerous and hazardous goods category and as such the driver should hold valid license to drive hazardous goods and therefore they repudiated the claim of the complainant and submitted that there is no deficiency in service and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
The transfer of permit dated 04-10-2008 to the complainant herein is evidenced under Ex.A4. It is the appellant/opposite party’s case that they repudiated the claim (Ex.B9) made by the insured on the ground that the driver did not have the necessary endorsement on the driving license.
We observe from the record that admittedly the vehicle was carrying Whisky load from Bangalore to Visakhpatnam and the surveyor inspected the sight on 18-3-2009 and assessed the net loss at Rs.1,87,100/-. The complainant had permission only to ply the vehicle within Andhra Pradesh but we observe from the record that the complainant obtained permit fromKarnatakaState The learned counsel for the appellant/opposite party contended that Peter Scotch whisky contains ethyl alcohol and therefore falls under the hazardous classification of Table 3 of Section 137 of Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989.
Chapter V of Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 deals with construction, equipment and maintenance of Motor Vehicle Rules, 91(c) defines “dangerous or hazardous goods” as under:
“dangerous or hazardous goods” means the goods of dangerous or hazardous nature to human life specified in Tables I, II and II to Rule 137”.
Rule 129 deals with transportation of goods of dangerous or hazardous nature to human life.
Table 1 to Rule 137 contains the labels which have to be displayed on the vehicle in relation to the dangerous or hazardous goods carried by them. Table II describes indicative criteria in respect of flammable chemicals. The following is the criteria:
“(b) Flammable Chemicals:
(i) flammable gases: chemicals which in the gaseous state at normal pressure and mixed with air become flammable and the boiling point of which at normal pressure is 20 Degree C or below:
(ii) highly flammable liquids: chemicals which have a flash point lower than 21 Degree C and the boiling point of which at normal pressure is above 20 Degree C;
(iii) flammable liquids: Chemicals which have a flash point lower than 55 Degrees C and which remain liquids under pressure, where particular processing conditions, such as high pressure and high temperature may create major accident hazards.
Table III contains the list of hazardous and toxic chemicals. One of the items described in this Table is ‘Ethyl Alcohol’ which is classified as flammable in the same Table’.
Ex.B7 filed by the opposite parties though states that the whisky bottle contains ethyl alcohol also states that they are fit for ‘human consumption’ and does not anywhere specify that the percentage of ethyl alcohol falls within the category of hazardous goods.
In the result this appeal is allowed in part and the order of the District Forum is modified only with respect to reducing the compensation from 1,00,000/- to Rs.25,000/- while confirming the rest of the order of the District Forum. Time for compliance four weeks.
JM
