- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against order dated 27.12.2013, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Koriya, Baikunthpur (C.G.) (henceforth District Forum") in Complaint Case No.49/2013. By the impugned order, learned District Forum, has dismissed the complaint of the appellant (complainant).
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case of the complaint filed before the District Forum are : that the appellant (complainant) is owner of a Pick Up 407 bearing registration No.C.G.16 -A -1820. On 14.05.2011 at about 2.00 P.M. the said vehicle was turtled near village Doobchola, Police Station Khadgawa and the vehicle was damaged extensively due to the accident. At the time of accident, the vehicle was being driven by driver Deepak Das. The said vehicle was insured with the respondent (O.P.) (Insurance Company) for the period from 01.10.2010 to 30.09.2011 under insurance policy No.93300031/2011/8243. The Insured Declared Value of the vehicle was Rs.4,96,168/ -. Thus, it is apparent that on the date of accident, the vehicle was insured with the respondent (O.P.). The appellant (complainant) appointed driver Deepak Das to drive the vehicle, who was having valid and effective driving licence No.1841/Kor/09, which was effective for the period from 01.06.2009 to 26.04.2014. Thus the owner of the vehicle in question has not violated the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The incident was reported to Police Station, Khadgawa where crime No.69/11 under Section 279, 337, 304(A) Cr. P.C. was recorded. The appellant (complainant) intimated regarding the incident to the respondent (Insurance Company). The appellant (complainant) got the vehicle repaired at Manendragarh and a bill of Rs.1,49,086/ - was prepared by the repairer. The appellant (complainant) submitted claim along with all relevant documents before the respondent (O.P.), but the claim No.193300 / 31/ 2012 / 000154 was repudiated by the respondent (O.P.) vide letter dated 08.02.2012. The respondent (O.P.) repudiated the claim of the appellant (complainant) and mentioned the reason that according to the report of the Investigator at the time of incident near about 40 persons were sitting in the vehicle out of which 8 -10 persons were injured and one person had died. The vehicle was insured as a goods vehicle and at the time of incident the vehicle in question was carrying passengers, thus the appellant (complainant) violated the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The respondent (Insurance Company) repudiated the claim of the appellant (complainant), which is baseless and erroneous and the respondent (Insurance Company) committed deficiency in service. Therefore, the appellant (complainant) filed consumer complaint before the District Forum seeking compensation from the respondent (O.P.), as mentioned in the relief clause of the complaint.
(3.) THE respondent (O.P.) filed written statement before the District Forum and pleaded that on the date of incident, the vehicle in question was returning to Paradol with 40 -50 baratis, which was negligently and rashly driven by driver Deepk Das under the influence of liquor and the vehicle was turtled in the way. Near about 40 -50 baratis were sitting in the vehicle in question and some of them sustained serious injuries and one Rajesh Velwashi had died in the accident. The appellant (complainant) owner used the vehicle in question for carrying passengers, which is against terms and conditions of the insurance policy. On the date of incident, the driver of the vehicle in question was being driven by driver Deepak Das without having any effective and valid driving licence contrary to terms and conditions of the policy and the vehicle was used for carrying baratis whereas the vehicle in question was registered as transport vehicle and for driving it licence for goods vehicle is required, but the appellant (complainant) was plying the vehicle violating the terms and conditions of the policy and in this circumstance, the respondent (O.P.) is not liable to pay any compensation to the appellant (complainant). Learned District Forum, after having considered the material placed before it by the parties, dismissed the complaint vide impugned order dated 27.12.2013.;