ORDER SRI. JIMMY KORAH (PRESIDENT) The case of the complainant is that complainant is the owner of a Two wheeler bearing Registration No. KL-4/S-7762. The said vehicle stolen on 3.6.2007 when it was parked before Karthiyayani Hotel, Cherthala. Complainant filed a complaint before Cherthala Police Station and filed an FIR as crime No.334/2007 of Cherthala Police Station under Section 379 IPC. Thereafter complainant filed claim application before the opposite party. But opposite party has not honoured the claim. Hence he filed this complaint alleging deficiency of service against the opposite party. 2. Notice was issued to the opposite party. But they were not appeared. Hence they set exparte. 3. Considering the contentions of the complainant this Forum raised following issues. a. Whether the complainant is entitled for compensation from the opposite parties establishing the deficiency as averred in the complaint? 4. Complainant given evidence and produced 10 documents. The documents are marked as Exts. A 1 to Al0. Ext. A 1 is the FIR and A 2 is final report of the police. Ext. A7 is the policy copy. Ext. A8 is the registration certificate. From Ext. A 7 it can be seen that the said Two wheeler was validly insured with opposite party on the date of lost. According to the complainant opposite party not honoured the claim on the reason that the rider has no valid driving license. The case of the complainant is that the vehicle was stolen when it was parked before Hotel Karthiyayani. There is no need of any license for parking a vehicle anywhere in India. As per the terms and conditions of the policy, the rider of the vehicle should have been an effective driving license only for driving a vehicle. Section 3 of the Motor Vehicle Act specifies the necessity for driving license. As per Section 3 of MV Act driving license is required and necessary for driving a vehicle in public place. Nowhere in the Motor Vehicles Act or in any other law specifies or demands for an owner of the vehicle shall have a driving license for being as an owner of avehicle. Hence the non payment of the insurance claim is not legally correct and valid. As per Ext. A 7 the vehicle was insured for Rs.30,100/-. From this amount Insurance company can deduct policy excess. The policy excess is Rs.500/-. Hence we direct to the insurance company to pay Rs.29,600/- with 9% interest from the date of filing the claim application tothe insurance company. The opposite party not honoured the claim on flimsy ground. Hence they are liable to pay compensation also. We are directing to pay compensation of Rs.l 0,000/- to the complainant. The complainant is also entitled to get cost of Rs.1000/-. In the result complaint allowed. Pronounced in open Forum, on this the 30th day of April 2010. Sd/- Sri. Jimmy Korah Sd/- Sri. K. Anirudhan Sd/- Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi Appendix:- Evidence of the complainant:- Ext. A1 - Attested copy of FIR (Photocopy) Ext. A2 - Attested copy of Final Report (Photocopy) Ext. A3 - Letter dtd. 05.07.07 Ext. A4 - Letter dtd. 26.02.08 Ext. A5 - Letter dtd. 16.03.07 Ext. A6 - Attested copy of FIS (Photocopy) Ext. A7 - Attested copy of Insurance Policy Certificate (Photocopy) Ext. A8 - Attested copy of R.C. Book (Photocopy) Ext. A9 - Attested copy of the Driving Licence of the complainant (Photocopy) Ext. A10 - Attested copy of the Scene Mahazar (Photocopy) Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil // True Copy // By Order Senior Superintendent To Complainant/Opposite Parties/S.F. Typed by:- vo/- Compared by:-
| | [HONORABLE K.Anirudhan] Member[HONORABLE JIMMY KORAH] PRESIDENT[HONORABLE Smt;Shajitha Beevi] Member | | 
