- (1.) LEAVE granted. Respondent Om Prakash Jain filed a complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bundi, Rajasthan (for short "the District Forum") claiming compensation in lieu of the damage caused to the vehicle (truck bearing Registration No. RJ 08 G 0023), which was purchased in the name of the firm, namely, M/s. Jain Oil Industries. According to him, the truck met with an accident on 20/9/1995 when he was going from Delhi to Jaipur with wheat loaded in the truck. The complainant pleaded that the driver of the truck Shri Taufiq Ahmad had valid driving licence.
(2.) THE appellant contested the complaint by alleging that the wheat did not belong to the complainant; that the truck was being used as public carrier for transporting the passengers and that the driver did not have valid and effective driving licence. On the issue of the driving licence, the District Forum noted that the original licence of Shri Taufiq Ahmad was issued in Assam on 22/1/1987 and was renewed by the District Transport Officer, Bundi for the period from 21/12/1992 to 19/1/1996. The District Forum further noted that as per the report of the District Transport Officer, Guwahati, the driving licence possessed by Shri Taufiq Ahmad was not issued by his office and held that the original licence of the driver was fake. The District Forum then referred to the evidence produced by the parties and concluded that the insured was guilty of violating the conditions of policy, inasmuch as it had transported goods belonging to others and allowed the use of vehicle for transportation of passengers. On that premise, the District Forum dismissed the complaint.
(3.) THE State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short "the State Commission") before which the respondent filed appeal, made the following observations on the issue of validity of driving licence of Shri Taufiq Ahmad: "There is also no dispute on the point that on verification of DL No. 19598 belonging to the driver Taufiq Mohd, it was not found to be a genuine one and later on the District Transport Officer, Guwahati had found that it was not issued from their office, meaning thereby it was a forged licence." Notwithstanding the aforesaid observation, the State Commission held that the Insurance Company cannot be absolved of its liability to compensate the owner of the vehicle, who cannot possibly be aware of the fact that the driver did not have a valid driving licence.;