Decided on March 11,2010

Dinesh Shandil S/O U R Shandil And Ors Respondents


- (1.) DISTRICT Forum below while allowing Complaint No. 305/2005 on 5.5.2007 has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs. 1,23,739/ - alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint, i. e 22.11.2005 till its realization. In addition to this, appellant has also been burdened with cost of litigation in the sum of Rs. 2000/ -. Hence this appeal. Only question involved in this appeal is whether on the facts as made out from the complaint file, impugned order calls for interference or not ?
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant had referred copy of certificate dated 12.1.2005 (it is page -73 of the complaint file), and submitted that driving licence of Mr. Rishipal S/o Sh. Om Parkash, R/o Ward No. 12, Nahan, District Sirmour was taken into custody in connection with FIR No. 23/2005, by Police at Police Station, Poanta. According to the appellant this driving licence was got verified by deputing an investigator who had contacted the licencing authority, Raipur in the State of Chhatisgarh. Investigator Sh. R. C. Banga approached the concerned licencing authority had checked up with the authority whether or not the licence in question had been issued by it or not. Affidavit of the investigator is at pages 45 and 46 of the complaint file. That being the position according to Mr. Sharma, District Forum below not only fell into error by following decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V/s Lehru and Ors., 2003 2 JT 595 but it also committed with grave judicial impropriety by ignoring the later decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. V/s Laxmi Narain Dhut, 2007 CTJ 445. He also referred to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United India Insurance Company Ltd. , V/s Davinder Singh, 2008 CTJ 11.
(3.) ON the other hand learned counsel for the respondent when faced with this situation, submitted that his client has been ruined as he has incurred substantial expense in getting the vehicle repaired after accident of 19.5.2004. With a view to support the claim of the respondent, Sh. Chandel further submitted that his client had engaged the driver after having seen the driving licence. In addition to this he was satisfied with the driving of the driver. Thus according to him his case is squarely covered by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. V/s Swaran Singh, 2004 3 SCC 297. Plea based on this decision as urged by Sh. Chandel is being noted to be rejected in the face of the later decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. , V/s Laxmi Narayan Dhut, wherein it has been specifically held that the decision in the Swaran Singh's case only covers the third party claim and not the case of own damage case as is the situation before us. It has been further mandated by the Supreme Court in this case that all High Courts and Commissions, will now proceed to decide the cases in the light of the said decision. To similar effect is an another decision of the Hon'ble supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. V/s J. Maheshwaramma, 2009 2 CPJ 89. Nothing to the contrary has been brought to our notice, except the case of National Insurance Company V/s Swaran Singh, .;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.