S.C.VYAS,PRESIDENT (ORAL) - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against order dated 16.7.2008 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter called "District Forum" for short) in complaint case No. 163/06, whereby the Insurance Company has been directed to pay Rs. 3,70,211along with interest @ 9% p.a. and cost of litigation Rs. 1,000 to the complainant on account of damages to the vehicle in a road accident, which was insured by the appellant Insurance Company.
(2.) THE facts of the case are that the complainant is the registered owner of Tata Sumo vehicle No. OR 02 AE -5565. Insurance coverage was obtained from the appellant from 19.3.2005 to 18.3.2006. During that period, that vehicle suffered damages in an accident near Railway gate. Claim was preferred by the respondent before Insurance Company. A Surveyor was appointed, who assessed the loss. One investigator was also appointed by the Insurance Company for investigation of the incident. During investigation it was observed by that investigator that licence of the driver was not issued by R.T.O., Raipur. On the basis of such report of the investigator the claim was repudiated by the Insurance Company, which compelled the respondent to come before District Forum by way of complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
(3.) IN reply the Insurance Company averred that the terms of the policy were violated, as the driver was not having valid and effective licence. The incident happened because of the negligent driving of the driver, who failed to take notice of incoming train and collapsed with it. Learned District Forum considered the material placed before it by both parties and found that Insurance Company has failed to prove that driving licence of the driver was a fake and forged document, the defence was not found tenable and complaint was allowed in the terms which have been stated in paragraph No. l.;