1. Quashment of the order dated 23.3.2006 passed by Divisional Consumers Protection Forum, Srinagar and the order dated 5.8.2009 passed by J & K State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Srinagar, is sought.

2. The short and only contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner is not liable to pay any compensation to the damage as caused to the vehicle (Scorpio) in the accident as occurred on 29.9.2003 because the driver, at the time of accident, did not possess valid and effective driving license and it is on the same basis claim of the complainant (respondent No. 1) was repudiated by the petitioner on 28.4.2004. The driver at the time of accident was having driving license authorizing him to drive heavy goods vehicle when the vehicle (Scorpio) is a light motor vehicle, so driver was not authorized to drive light motor vehicle.

3. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment reported in (2006) 4 SCC 250, judgment rendered by Coordinate Bench in CIMA No. 24/2009 dated 13.5.2010 in the case titled National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mohammad Ishaq Khanday & ors, AIR 2008 SC 2266 and AIR 2008 SC 2218.

4. In opposition learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 placed reliance on the judgments reported in National Insurance Company v. Irfan Sidiq Bhat & Anr. 2004(11) S.L.J. 623(DB): 2005 (1) JKJ 42 [HC] and National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mr. Manzoor Ahmad Bhat 2009(1) SLJ 379 :2009 (4) JKJ 103 [HC].

5. In view of the said contentions, both learned counsel agreed for disposal of this petition at this stage itself and also submitted that in view of admitted factual position, no further pleadings are required. In4 view of this submission, petition is admitted to hearing and is taken up for final adjudication.

6. Respondent No. 1 (complainant) purchased vehicle (Mahindra Scorpio) from Chowdhary Motors Pvt. Ltd. Narwal Bye-pass, Jammu against the cost of Rs.7,10,228/and got it insured with the insurer (National Insurance Company) under Policy No. 421006/31/03/6303230 for the period commencing 23.9.2003 to 22.9.2004. The vehicle while on its way to Srinagar means on transit met with an accident on 28.9.2003, got damaged and in the accident various persons also got injured. The information about accident is stated to have been given to the insurer and the insurer appointed its surveyor Mr. Rajesh Gupta who vide his survey report dated 23.12.2003 has given the particulars of the vehicle and particulars of driver, according to which the driver possessed the driving license issued by Licensing Authority L. A. Zun Zun Rajasthan on 22.11.1985 and renewed vide No. R-118/BPT by L. A. Baghpat (UP) and the type of licence is recorded "H.T.V".

7. In the driving licence, copy of which is placed on record, the licence is shown to have been issued for driving the vehicle "Heavy Transport Vehicle" (H.T.V) and in pursuance of renewal dated 10.11.1998 it has been recorded as "for H.T.V(PE)". This position has been got verified by the insurer through another surveyor Raj Kumar (Chartered Investigator) who vide his report dated March, 2004 has clarified that on verification from the office of ARTO, Baghpat, the renewal R-118 dated 10.11.1998 stands in the name of Shri Rajesh Kumar S/O Shri Sanjeet Singh R/O Village & Post Subhanpur District Baghpat and the licence is for HTV(PE) only and is valid from 10.11.1998 to 9.11.2001 and lastly has been renewed with effect from 3.1.2002 to 2.1.2005.

8. The insurer vide communication dated 25.5.2004 has conveyed to the insured that the vehicle involved in the accident is a light passenger vehicle. The driver was not holding a valid and effective driving licence which is a violation of the policy, as such, claim is repudiated.

9. The complainant (respondent No. 1) lodged the complaint before the Divi­sional Consumers Protection Forum, Srinagar (hereinafter referred to as "D-Forum"). Learned D-Forum after considering the submissions and the evidence while relying on t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document