Per Shri S.R.Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member:-
This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 08/07/2010 passed in consumer complaint no.124/2010, Yuvraj Shamrao Gaikwad V/s. Divisional Manager, Shri Shankarrao S.Deshmukh, Satara passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Satara. It is the case of the appellant/org.complainant that he owns a medium goods vehicle (M.G.V.) having registration no.MH-11-AL-1929 which had a permit to carry goods within State of Maharashtra. Said vehicle was insured with respondent/org.opp.party for period from to 03/04/2009 to 02/04/2010. It met with an accident on 22/09/2009 around 6.00 a.m. It was driven empty at the time of accident. Insurance claim was made, which stood repudiated by the insurance company as per its letter dated 21/01/2010 and feeling aggrieved thereby, this consumer complaint was filed on 21/04/2010. Same stood dismissed upholding the case of insurance company about suppression of material facts and that the driver of the vehicle at the time of accident was not holding an effective and valid driving license. Therefore, org. complainant has preferred this appeal. At first instance, it could be seen that org.complaint was filed against one Shri Shankarrao S.Deshmukh, who is a Divisional Manager of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and not against the insurance company, which is the service provider. Even if for sake of argument it is assumed that consumer complaint is filed against the proper service provider i.e. insurance company, still repudiation of the insurance claim on the above mentioned ground cannot be faulted with. Admittedly, as per claim lodged by the complainant/appellant, he has misled the insurance company by supplying wrong name of the driver. With reference to this he has given explanation that all specific information about the driver at the time of accident was not asked and therefore, he had not given the actual name of the person who was driving the vehicle. It is an eye wash and appears to be a very lame and false explanation, which cannot be accepted. The person who was actually found driving as per information given to the police was Prashant Laxman Tarade. As per his driving license, he is permitted to drive LMV vehicle and not a medium goods vehicle at the time of accident. Therefore, repudiation as done by the insurance company cannot be faulted with. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the insurance company. For the reasons stated above, we uphold the finding given by the Forum below dismissing the consumer complaint. Appeal is devoid of any substance. Hence, we pass the following order:- :-ORDER-: 1. Appeal stands dismissed in limine. 2. Parties are left to bear their own costs. 3. Copies of the order herein be furnished to the parties. |
