Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 13]

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Musharaf Alam on 25 April, 2007

  
 
 
 
 
 
 IN THE STATE COMMISSION:DELHI
  
 
 
 
 
 
 







 



 

   

 

 IN THE STATE COMMISSION:   DELHI  

 

(Constituted under Section 9
of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986) 

 

  

 

Date of
Decision: 25.04.2007 

 

   

 

 Appeal No. 07/200 

 

(Arising out of Order dated  15-02-2007 passed by the District
Consumer Forum, Room No. 2 & 3,   Old  Civil  Supply  Building,   Tis
  Hazari Court,  Delhi in
Complaint Case No. 718/2006) 

 

  

 

  

 

M/s.New India Assurance Co. Ltd.  Appellant 

 

10th Floor,Core-I,   Scope  Tower, through  

 

Laxmi Nagar, Mr. V.K. Anand, 

 

Delhi-110092. advocate. 

 

  

 

  

 

Versus 

 

  

 

  

 

Mr. Musharaf Alam  Respondent 

 

C/o M/s Hyatt Golden Tpt. Co.,

 

16, Shopping-cum-office complex,

 

New Subzi Mandi,   New Delhi.

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 CORAM: 

 

   

 

Justice J.D.
Kapoor  President 

 

Ms. Rumnita
Mittal  Member 
   

1. Whether Reporters of local newspapers be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?

 

Justice J.D. Kapoor, President (Oral).

1. Respondent got his vehicle insured with the appellant against cover of theft. The vehicle was met with an accident while on its way to Belgam. The respondent lodged a report with the Police and informed the appellant about the accident. The appellant appointed a surveyor for assessing the loss. On the advice of the surveyor he got the vehicle repaired by incurring the expenses of Rs. 53,000/-. When his claim was repudiated on the ground that the driver was not holding a valid driving licence on the date of accident, he filed the instant complaint before the District Forum.

2. Vide impugned order dated 15.02.2007 the District Forum allowed the complaint by directing the appellant to pay Rs.

49,744/- towards the claim as assessed by the surveyor and Rs. 10,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment and Rs. 2,000/- towards cost of litigation. Feeling aggrieved the appellant has preferred this appeal.

3. Main contention of the counsel for the appellant is that the driving licence issued from Transport Authority Agra was fake and forged licence and therefore the respondent was not entitled for any claim.

4. We have perused the impugned order and find that no such report was ever produced or filed by the surveyor or by the investigating officer of the appellant to the effect that licence was neither issued from Transport Authority Agra and was a fake or forged or fabricated licence.

5. No employer is expected to undertake the enquiry from the Transport Authority who issued the licence and should employ a driver only after being satisfied with the genuineness of the licence. No employer will employ a driver on the basis of fake or forged licence as such a risk cannot be taken by the employer. Unless the employer is satisfied by the safe driving skill of a driver, he will not continue him in his employment. Even if later on the driving licence is found to be unauthorized or fake, the employer cannot suffer the consequences particularly in view of the renewed licence.

6. Driving licence is issued only when a person is capable of driving the vehicle and has the reasonable driving skills. Merely because in the instant case the driving licence was renewed after 25 days of the accident does not mean that the driver was not having any driving skills or was not capable of driving the vehicle. Whenever driving licence is renewed, the driver is always subjected to a fresh test.

7. Mere connotation of word renewal means that a person whose licence is being renewed has a driving skill and driving licence is renewed with retrospective effect. Renewed licence is almost a new licence as it is issued after subjecting the person to a fresh driving test.

8. We do not find any infirmity in the impugned order and dismiss the appeal.

9. Payment shall be made within one moth from the date of receipt of this order.

   

10. Bank Guarantee/FDR, if any furnished by the appellant, be returned forthwith.

11. A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to Record room.

12. Announced on 25th day of April, 2007.

     

(Justice J.D. Kapoor) President     (Rumnita Mittal) Member         ysc