Oriental Insurance Company Limited & 3 ... vs Md. Israil on 11 January, 2024
16. The petitioner's primary concern revolves around the validity of the driver's license, specifically that of Md. Nizam, involved in the accident on 04.06.2008 and challenged the acceptance of the forged license by the District Forum, despite presenting evidence from the District Transport Office confirming that the license was forged. The petitioner contended that the insured vehicle, driven by Md. Nizam, had license that had expired on 23.07.2007, prior to the accident. They contested the State Commission's reliance on specific judgments which are distinguishable from the current case. To support the stand, the petitioner cited precedents like National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Saheb Singh (2010) 14 SCC 766 and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Zaharulnisha and Ors (2008) 12 SCC 385. Their argument revolves around proving the fundamental breach on the part of the insured concerning the policy condition regarding the driver's valid license and its direct contribution to the accident. This becomes crucial in determining the admissibility of the insurance claim. There is no third-party claim under dispute and the claim in question is that of owner/ insured himself who allowed the vehicle to be driven by a person who has no valid driving license to drive the said vehicle, which had met with the accident. This is in in breach of Motor Vehicles Act as well as terms of the insurance contract in question. Therefore, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief from the insurer under the policy in question.