IRSHAD HUSSAIN,PRESIDENT - (1.) THIS is insurer's appeal against the order dated 10.5.2007 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Uttarkashi allowing the consumer complaint No. 117 of 2005 and awarding Rs. 1,25,000 as compensation for accidental vehicle with interest @ 6% p.a. w.e.f. 22.12.2005 till the date of actual payment and Rs. 1,000 as litigation expenses to the complainant - respondent No. 1.
(2.) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the complainant and carefully perused the material on record and considered the legal aspects of the case. Learned Counsel for the Insurance Company argued that the so -called transferee of the insured bus No. UP07C -0239 has no locus standi to file the complaint in view of the policy of insurance having not been transferred in favour of the complainant; that there was no privity of contract between the complainant and the Insurance Company and that the District Forum fell in error in holding that the complainant was entitled to be indemnified for the loss occasioned by reason of the accident of the vehicle. Perusal of the record reveals that the certificate of insurance (Paper No. 38) was issued in favour of previous owner of the vehicle Sh. Shiv Singh. Copy of the policy of insurance referred above indicates that the period of the validity of the insurance was w.e.f. 14.5.2003 to 13.5.2004.
(3.) IT is not in dispute that the complainant Sh. Gajender Singh Butola had purchased the vehicle from its previous owner Sh. Shiv Singh, who was impleaded as opposite party No. 2 in the consumer complaint and that the vehicle had been duly transferred on 21.2.2003 in favour of the complainant. After the transfer of the vehicle in favour of the complainant, the Insurance Company could not have legally issued insurance policy of the vehicle in favour of Sh. Shiv Singh, who ceased to have any interest whatsoever in the vehicle. Vehicle in question was under insurance coverage with the appellant -Insurance Company even prior to the period of insurance from 14.5.2003 to 13.5.2004 and it was a case of renewal of insurance policy, as was also mentioned by the Insurance Company in its letter dated 23.6.2004 (Paper No. 21Kha/12 of the original record), sent by the company to Sh. Shiv Singh, calling upon him to explain as to why the policy of insurance for the said period was taken by him, despite transfer of the vehicle in favour of the complainant Sh. Gajender Singh Butola on 21.2.2003. Issuance of policy of insurance in favour of Sh. Shiv Singh clearly appears to be on account of mistake mainly on the part of the Insurance Company, which was obliged to verify from the registration certificate of the vehicle, as to the name of the registered owner of the vehicle before renewing the policy of insurance for the period 14.5.2003 to 13.5.2004. It is of significance that cheque No. 205601 dated 14.5.2003 of State Bank of India, Uttarkashi for sum of Rs. 10,184 towards premium for the said period, was issued by the complainant Sh. Gajender Singh Butola and the said amount of Rs. 10,184 was duly debited in the account of the complainant, as is evident from the entries of the passbook (Paper Nos. 25Kha/3 to 25Kha/4) as well as statement issued by the State Bank of India, Uttarkashi (Paper No. 25Kha/2), when the cheque was sent for encashment by the Insurance Company. The facts, thus, made clear, are that the policy of the insurance was renewed for the period 14.5.2003 to 13.5.2004 and the premium having been paid by the complainant, the Insurance Company made a mistake in issuing the policy of insurance in the name of erstwhile owner Sh. Shiv Singh, who ceased to have any interest whatsoever in the accidental vehicle.;