Case nº Revision Petition No. 1407 Of 2014, (Against the Order dated 30/09/2013 in Appeal No. 1477/2010 of the State Commission Gujarat) of NCDRC Cases, May 09, 2017 (case Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Jivabhai Maldebhai Godhaniya)
| Judge | For Appellant: Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate and For Respondents: Ms. Manisha T. Karia, Advocate with Ms. Nidhi Nagpal, Advocate |
| President | Dr. B.C. Gupta,Presiding Member and Mr. Dr. S.M. Kantikar,Member |
| Resolution Date | May 09, 2017 |
| Issuing Organization | NCDRC Cases |
Order:
Dr. B.C. Gupta, Presiding Member
-
This revision petition has been filed under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against the impugned order dated 30.09.2013, passed by the Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, (hereinafter referred to as "the State Commission") in Appeal No. 1477/2010, Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Jivabhai Maldebhai Godhaniya, vide which, while dismissing the appeal, the order dated 05.10.2010 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jamnagar in Consumer Complaint No. 3/2009, filed by the present respondent, allowing the said complaint, was upheld.
-
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the complainant/respondent Jivabhai Maldebhai Godhaniya is the owner of a light commercial vehicle no. GJ10X 6204, manufactured by the Mahindra & Mahindra Company. He obtained a commercial vehicle package policy, bearing no. 1604372329101536, valid from 18.06.2007 to 17.06.2008 from the petitioner/opposite party (OP) Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. During the period of insurance, the said vehicle met with an accident on 13.08.2007 when it was being driven by Hamirbhai Lalabhai Modhvadiya. The vehicle is stated to have suffered heavy damage during the accident for which a claim for Rs. 5,25,302/- was submitted before the Insurance Company after giving due intimation to them about the accident. The petitioner/OP Insurance Company appointed a surveyor to assess the loss, but the insurance claim was rejected on 04.02.2008 by the petitioner, saying that the driver had no valid licence to drive the said vehicle at the time of the accident. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the petitioner for repudiation of the claim, the complainant filed the consumer complaint in question, seeking directions to the petitioner to provide an amount of Rs. 5,25,302/- to him alongwith interest @ 18% per annum and also to give compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for mental agony etc.
-
The complaint was resisted by the petitioner Insurance Company by filing a written statement before the District Forum, in which it was stated that the complainant had a light commercial vehicle meant for carrying goods etc. and hence, it was a transport vehicle. However, the driver did not have a valid licence for driving this type of vehicle. The driver had licence for LMV vehicle i.e. Light Motor Vehicle, which was meant for driving a private vehicle only and not a transport vehicle.
-
The District Forum, after taking into account the averments of the parties, allowed the complaint on non-standard basis and stated that the complainant shall be liable to be given 75% of the amount of Rs. 2,99,000/- as assessed by the surveyor. A sum of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation was also awarded by the District Forum vide their order dated 05.10.2010. Being aggrieved against this order of the District Forum, the petitioner Insurance Company challenged the same by way of an appeal before the State Commission, but the said appeal having been dismissed, vide impugned order, the petitioner Insurance Company is before us by way of the present Revision Petition.
-
During...
To continue reading
Request your trial