Mr.P.N. Kashalkar – Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member:
(1) This is an appeal filed by the original Opponent against the judgement and award passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Satara in Consumer Complaint No.30/2000 decided on 10.08.2000. By allowing the complaint filed by the Respondent herein the District Forum, Satara directed Insurance Company to pay a sum of `70,000/- to the Respondent/original Complainant with interest @15% per annum from 08.10.1999 till actual payment and directed to pay `5,000/- for mental harassment and `1,000/- as costs. Taking strong exception to the order passed by the District Forum the original Opponent has filed this appeal.
(2) Undisputed facts are that the Complainant owned Tempo Tracks Jeep bearing No. MH-11-G-5951 and he had taken comprehensive insurance cover. On 17.06.1999 said vehicle met with an accident and according to Complainant he had spent amount of `82,906/- for repairs of the said Tempo Tracks Jeep. After payment of bill he had lodged insurance claim with the insurance Company. However, insurance Company by letter dated 08.10.1999 rejected the claim on the ground that at the time of accident the driver of the vehicle was not having effective driving license. Therefore, he filed consumer complaint in the District Forum and it was contested by the Appellant herein. The Appellant in the Written Version clearly pleaded that at the time of accident the driver Shri Vilas Laxman Mane was not having effective driving license. He was holding valid license upto 14.04.1999 and the accident took place on 17.06.1999. The driver of the vehicle renewed license w.e.f. 28.07.1999. The District Forum ignored this important pleading of the Insurance Company and held that the person who is having driving license for 4/5 years must be presumed to be having effective skill to drive vehicle and on that ground the District Forum allowed the complaint. As such the Insurance Company has filed this appeal.
(3) We are finding that the contention of Advocate Mr.R.P. Bafna, for the Appellant is having substance. At the time of accident, driver of the vehicle Mr.Vilas Laxman Mane was not having valid driving license . He had taken driving license on 12.04.1996 and it ended on 11.04.1999 and thereafter(i.e.within grace period) he had not applied for renewal of license. He renewed his license on 28.07.1999. So at the time of accident which took place on 17.06.1999 driver was not having effective driving license and therefore, on this ground itself the District Forum ought to have dismissed the complaint, but it erroneously allowed the complaint holding that the driver driving the vehicle for 4/5 years can be presumed to be expert in driving. This type of observation is hypothetical and cannot be allowed to sustain in law. The fact remains that at the time of accident driver of the vehicle was not having effective license, policy holder had thereby committed breach of terms and conditions of the policy issued by the Insurance Company. The District Forum should have dismissed the complaint but It erroneously allowed the complaint and as such by allowing this appeal the award passed by the District Forum will have to be quashed and set aside.
(4) We mention specifically that this appeal was lying unattended for pretty long time and on 1st August, 2011 it was placed before us. On finding both the parties were absent, we had directed office to issue notice to both the parties by R.P.A.D. Accordingly, notices were issued to the Respondent on 12.09.2011 but today Respondent is absent and therefore, we have no option but to allow the appeal as mentioned above. Hence, we pass the following order:
O R D E R
(i) Appeal is allowed.
(ii) The order passed by the District Forum is hereby quashed and set aside.
(iii) The Complaint No.30/2000 stands dismissed.
(iv) Inform the parties accordingly.
Pronounced on 19th September, 2011.
