ORDER
SH. RAKESH KAPOOR, PRESIDENT
An application for rejection of the complaint filed by the complainant in this forum is pending disposal. The complainant has filed a reply opposing the application.
We have heard arguments advanced at the bar and have perused the record.
Briefly stated facts leading to the filing of this application are as under:-
The complainant is the registered owner of a car bearing no. DL 1XB 7246 and had purchased a policy of insurance in respect of the said car from the OP which was valid for the period 26.6.2011 to 25.6.2012. On 6.7.2011, the car had met with an accident resulting in the death of one Bhajju alias Pyare Lal. The mother of the deceased had filed a claim U/s 166 of M.V. Act before MACT Jhansi (U.P.). The MACT Jhansi had awarded a sum of Rs. 1,96,500/- as compensation along with interest @ 7% p.a. in favour of the mother of the deceased against the insurance company which was given the right to recover the awarded amount from the complainant. The insurance company has , therefore, filed a petition U/s 174 MV Act against the complainant for recovery of the said amount in a Court at Jhansi (U.P.). It is alleged by the complainant that the said claim has been filed on the false grounds that the driver/ complainant was not holding a valid driving licence at the time of accident. It is also stated that the insurance company had on the other hand paid the own damage claim to the complainant.
The complainant herein has claimed deficiency in service on the part of the insurance company which had not duly verified the license of the driver/ complainant and had wrongly taken a stand that it was fake. The complainant has alleged that he had obtained a report from the transport Department ,Delhi about the validity of the license and had forwarded it to the insurance company but it had failed to take cognizance of the same. The complainant has therefore approached this forum and has sought the following reliefs:
(A) Award a sum of Rs.2,67,453/- (Rupees Two Lacs Sixty Seven Thousand Four Hundred and Fifty Three Only) in favour of the Complainant and against the Respondent as detailed in the complaint.
- Award pendentalite and future interest at the rate of 36% per annum till actual payment is received by the Complainant
- Award cost of the Complaint in favour of the Complainant.
- Convenience charges also be awarded in favour of the Complainant including physical and mental agony suffered by the him.
- Pass such further and or other order/s as this Hon'ble Court/Forum may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstance of the resent case.
In its application under consideration , the Insurance Company has claimed that the present complaint is barred by time as the cause of action had accrued in July/ August ,2011. The insurance company has also claimed that the present complaint is not maintainable as this forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the same. It has been pointed out that an MACT had awarded compensation in a death claim and had given a right of recovery to the insurance company on the ground that the driver/ complainant was not holding a valid driving license. It has claimed that the question as to whether the complainant was holding a valid driving license or not cannot be the subject matter of a separate complaint before this forum. Hence, the application.
Having gone through the record ,we agree with the contention raised by the learned counsel for the OP. The sole question in this complaint as to whether the complainant/ driver was holding a valid driving license or not. This question was in consideration before the MACT Jhansi who had decided that the driver was not holding a valid driving license. If the complainant was not satisfied with the findings of the MACT Jhansi in this regard, he could have filed an appeal before the appellate authority against the said findings. The present complaint alleging deficiency on the part of the OP in rejecting the plea of the complainant that he was holding a valid driving license is not maintainable in this forum.
Accordingly we allow the application filed by the OP and hold that the complainant has no cause of action to this complaint against the OP. The complaint is not maintainable and is dismissed.
A copy of this order be made available to both the parties free of cost as per law.
Announced on _________________.
