1. Brief facts of the case is that the complainant is the registered owner of the vehicle bearing Regd.No.OR-15-M-7161 and was insured with the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vide Policy No.345600/831/2011/000404 valid till dtd.17.11.2011.
2. The said vehicle met an accident while plying on 13.02.2011 at about 10.5 near Netaji Chowk, Burla being driver by Biswambar Bhoi. As per the complainant the said driver Biswambar Bhoi had valid license bearing D.L.No. OR-1520020021317 issued from R.T.O., Sambalpur being endorsed transport and no-transport valid from 04.10.2011(Transport and 04.10.2028. The policy was valid from 18.11.2010 to midnight of 17.11.2011 in which period the accident took place.
3. The complainant intimated the letter to the O.P vide letter No.345600/31/2011/5958 dated 21.12.2011 and also lodged an case vide P.S.Case No.23(6) dtd.14.02.2011 in Burla Police Station , which corresponding to G.R. Case No.265/11 pending in the court of S.D.J.M., Sambalpur.
4. The vehicle was inspected by Surveyor Lokesh Nayak, S.K.Malhotra and finally Surveyor H.P. Singh and presented survey report. After preparation of estimate, the vehicle was being repaired and final bill cash memo was Rs.2,82,944/- was submitted.
5. During the processing of claim, the O.P repudiated the claim and refused to settle the claim on the ground that the “driver was not holding a professional driving licence and the vehicle was carrying passenger”. As per the complainant the vehicle was not carrying passengers though it was a commercial vehicle and the driver was holding both Transport and Non-transport driving licence, which was valid and effective which mounting to unfair trade practice and deficiency of services and for which the complainant suffered mental agony , loss without his fault.
6. The O.P appearance and filed his version that the O.P is not disputed that the complainant had a valid insurance policy covering the period from 18.11.2010 to 17.11.2011 vide No.345600/31/2011/5958 for vehicle bearing No.OR-15-M-7161 (Bolero Commercial Passenger Carriage Vehicle) containing various terms and conditions and the insurer are bound to perform their part of respective obligations before claiming any indemnification in terms of the policy.
7. As per his version it is a paramount and fundamental condition of the policy that the insured should not allow such person who had not and affective and valid Driving licence to drive such category of vehicle and violation of the clause tantamount breach of the condition. Consequent upon which the insured forfeits his right of indemnification in terms of the policy and became disentitled to get imbursement of the loss or damage from the insurance company. It is the core duty and obligation of the insured to be vigilant and careful not to entrust vehicle to any unlicensed person to drive. The O.P further mentioned in his written version that the said driver Biswambar Bhoi has been only authorized to drive (I) Light motor vehicle Non-Transport w.e.f 07.05.2002 .(II) Motor cycle with gear w.e.f. 05.10.2005. (III) Transport vehicle only. The insured vehicle is a commercial passenger carriage vehicle as per the policy so also the R.C.Book . So the driver was not authorized to drive the insured category of vehicle and therefore the said D.L was not affective as on the date of accident. As per his version the insured has committed breach of the policy condition and therefore he is not entitled to be get any claim and the claim is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed.

The following issues are settled accordingly:-

1. Whether the complainant is the consumer of the O.p?
2. Had the driver a valid license to ply the said vehicle at the time of met accident?
3. Is the complainant is entitled to get any relief?

ISSUE NO.1:- Whether the complainant is the consumer of the O.P?

                   The complainant is the registered owner of the vehicle bearing Regd. No.OR-15-M-7161 which was duty insured with the Opp. Party vide policy No.345600/831/2011/000404 valid from 18.11.2010 to midnight of 17.11.2011 and paid an total premium Rs.12, 561.00 with Add. Service Tax and Stamp Duty total paid Rs.13,855.00 to the O.P. Hence, the complainant is the consumer of the O.P.

ISSUE NO.2:-     Had the driver a Valid license to ply the said vehicle at the time of met accident ?

          The driver had a valid license for plying light motor vehicle transport goods at the time of accident. The Driving License of Biswambar Bhoi bearing D.L.No.1520020021317 dtd.07.05.2002 shows that:-

1. Light motor vehicle non-transport w.e.f. 07.05.2002.
2. Motor cycle with Gear w.e.f 05.10.2005.
3. Light motor vehicle transport goods w.e.f. 05.10.2005.
4. Transport vehicle Regd. M/HMV (Regid Chassis) –Private Service Vehicle – Bus w.e.f.05.12.2011.

So at the time of accident the driver had a valid license.

ISSUE NO.3:- Is the complainant is entitle to get any relief?

          Yes. The complainant is entitled to get relief because the policy is a valid policy and while doing the policy, the O.P gave assurance in his policy that loss of or damage to the vehicle insured under and / or its accessories whilst there on in column No.

(VI) by accidental external means;

(IX) Whilst in transit by road, rail, in land, Water way, lift elevator or air.

          Hence, the complainant is entitled to get relief.

So it is ordered as under:-

                                      ORDER.

          The complaint petition is allowed. The Opp. Party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.2, 82,944/- towards repairing charges of the vehicle to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order failing which the amount will carry interest @ 9% per annum till realization.

          Order pronounced in the open court on this 27^th day of April, 2022.