CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (CENTRAL)

ISBT KASHMERE GATE DELHI

CC/186/2017

No. DF/ Central/                                                                      Date

Sh. Khalil Ahmed

S/o Sh. Rujdar

R/o House no. 51, Block No. 1 & 2

Village Luhinga Kalan, District Gurgaon,

Haryana-122002.                                                                 …..COMPLAINANT       

 VERSUS

National Insurance Company Limited

Above HDFC Bank, Jhandewalan,

New Delhi-110055.                                                          …..OPPOSITE PARTY

Quorum  : Ms. Rekha Rani, President                                                                                        

                 Ms. Manju Bala Sharma, Member

                 Dr. R.C. Meena, Member

ORDER

Ms. Rekha Rani, President

1. Instant complaint has been filed by Sh. Khalil Ahmed (in short the complainant) under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended inter-alia pleading therein that he purchased a truck bearing no. HR 74 6122 in the year 2010 for the purpose of earning livelihood and the same was driven by his brother.  The same was insured with National Insurance Company Limited (in short OP) and the insurance policy was valid from 08.11.2015 to 07.11.2016. The truck met with an accident on 28.03.2016 at Jewargi, Gulbarga, Karnataka. The vehicle was driven by Nasir, brother of the complainant.  The vehicle was totally damaged.  FIR was reported immediately and the truck was towed from Karnataka to Sohna, Haryana.  Crane charges were Rs. 72,000/-.  Thereafter on 18.06.2016 the estimate for the repairs of the vehicle was prepared by VK Motors, authorised service station of Tata Motors at Rs.14,67,601.50/-.  Complainant filed his claim with OP along with surveyor report. His claim was repudiated by OP vide letter dated 02.11.2016 wherein it was stated that driving license of the driver, Nasir, was not valid as per the notification issued by Government of Nagaland. Hence, instant complaint was filed seeking direction to OP to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.19,12,601.50/- along with interest @ 18% per annum till recovery of the same.     
2. On receipt of notice of the instant complaint, OP appeared and contested the claim vide its written statement. It is pleaded that the complaint is not maintainable under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, 1908 as complainant has not come to the court with clean hands. It is stated that the driver was driving the vehicle without valid and proper driving license. It is stated that driving license of Nasir (in short the driver) was issued by Government of Nagaland and was not a smart card. It is stated that after noting large numbers of fake driving licences, Government of Nagaland, Motor Vehicle Department, Office of the Transport Commissioner, Kohima, Nagaland, issued a public circular bearing no.TC-23/MV/2001(PT-1) dated 01.08.2014 to the effect that any driving licence other than smart card would be treated as cancelled or invalid w.e.f. December, 2014.  The accident took place on 28.03.2016 and the driver was holding an invalid driving licence and hence the claim is not maintainable.
3. We have heard Sh. Manish Mishra, counsel for complainant and Ms. Neeta Malhotra, counsel for OP.  Parties have filed evidence by way of affidavits.  They have also filed written arguments.
4. It is not in dispute that the vehicle in question is insured with OP which met with an accident.  The claim has been repudiated by OP on the ground that driving licence of the deceased driver was not genuine at the time of the accident.
5. Circular of Ministry of Nagaland, Motor Vehicles Department, Office of the Transport Commissioner, Kohima, Nagaland is produced by OP in Para 4 of the written statement according to which driving licence is issued on smart card through the National Software “SARATHI” from 30.10.2009.  The circular discontinued the issuance of driving licence in booklet form.  It further envisaged that any driving licence issued by any authority in Nagaland after 30.10.2009 is not genuine.  Persons holding driving licence in booklet form or any other manual format were required to obtain driving licence in smart card form before 01.12.2014.

The accident took place on 28.03.2016.

It is submitted by OP that circular was issued on 01.08.2014 granting the opportunity to persons holding driving licence in manual format to change into smart card format before 01.12.2014 and even after lapse of 2 years, the driver did not make any efforts to get his Driving licence converted into smart card.  Driving licence of the deceased driver was issued on 06.11.2010 so it was required to be converted into smart card.  Driving licence was required to be issued through National Software “SARTHI”.

6. In view of the notification of Ministry of Nagaland, Motor Vehicles Department, Office of the Transport Commissioner, Kohima, Nagaland dated 01.08.2014, the repudiation is justified.  The complaint is dismissed.  Copy of this order be sent to the complainant as per rules. File be consigned to record room.

Announced thisDay of2019.