Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member

Present Appeal is filed by one Sri Aju Mandal against the Order dated 02-06-2016 passed by the Ld. District Forum, Dakshin Dinajpur in C.C. No. 09/2016.

Brief facts of the complaint case are that a tractor purchased by the Complainant sustained severe damage on 27-06-2015 when the driver lost control of the said tractor.  The Complainant intimated the matter to the local Police Station on 30-06-2015 and on the basis of said information, the concerned Police Station started M.A. Case No. 01/2015 dated 04-07-2015 and seized the vehicle along with documents.Repairing cost of the said tractor was estimated at Rs. 4,07,912/- by the authorized service centre and so the Complainant claimed the said amount from the OP Insurance Company.  However, the OP Insurance Complainant repudiated his claim on 31-07-2016 alleging that the driver did not have effective driving licence.  Hence, the complaint.

The Ld. District Forum dismissed the complaint at the admission stage.

Decision with reasons

Ld. Advocates for both the parties argued at length justifying their respective stand on the issue.  Heard both sides attentively and also gone through the material on record.

The relevant portion of the observation of the Ld. District Forum behind dismissal of the complaint is appended below.

“On perusal of the documents it is found that the tractor was seized at the PS i.e. after the lapse of 7 days and at that time the driving licence was produced therefore, it cannot be said that at the time of driving the tractor, the driver had valid licence at the relevant point of time. Apart from the said fact whenever the tractor fell down from the bridge the driver of the said tractor did not sustain any injury and no case was started u/s 279/338 IPC. The documents filed by the complainant do not inspire confidence that the driver had valid licence at the time of driving the tractor since, the documents produced by the complainant can be said to be manufactured documents”.    

A bird’s eye view of the aforesaid observation is suffice to discern that at the admission stage itself, the Ld. District Forum delved into the merit of the complaint. Of course, the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 envisage speedy disposal of cases.  However, that does not necessarily mean that District Forum would adjudicate disputes at breakneck speed; after all, unreasonable haste is the direct road to error. 

Deciding the authenticity of a driving licence at the admission stage itself is easier said than done. Moreover, the analogy put forth by the Ld. District Forum is not at all convincing.  Simply because of the fact that driving licence was produced before the Police Authority after 7 days since occurrence of the alleged accident, how could that be a cogent ground to suspect the very authenticity of a driving licence is beyond our comprehension. 

In fact, on a reference to the photocopy of driving licence as well as Extract of the Driving Licence issued by the Licensing Authority, Transport Department, Dakshin Dinajpur, it transpires that the driving licence of the driver of subject vehicle was issued on 28-06-2010 and the same was valid till 27-06-2016.  Since the alleged incident occurred on 27-06-2015, it is clear that at the time of alleged occurrence of peril, the driving licence in question was very much in vogue.  It also transpires from the driving licence that the driver was authorized to drive tractor.  Therefore, prima facie there was no infirmity with the driving licence in question.     

The Ld. District Forum also found fault with the complaint case on the ground that although the subject tractor fell down from the bridge, the driver of the said tractor did not sustain any injury and no case started u/s 279/338, IPC.  I afraid, all these facts cannot be decided at the admission stage.  It requires proper evaluation of the evidence being put forth by the claimant to come to a definite conclusion. 

For all these reasons, I cannot appreciate the impugned order and deem it fit and proper to remand the case to Ld. District Forum for adjudication of the complaint on merit after issuing proper notice to the Respondents/OPs.

The Appeal, thus, succeeds.

Hence,

O R D E R E D

That the Appeal be and the same is allowed on contest.  The impugned order is hereby set aside. Appellant to appear before the Ld. District Forum on 29-12-2017.