An insurer cannot repudiate claims based solely on the validity of a driver's license when the incident occurred with the vehicle stationary, demonstrating deficiencies in service under the policy.

O R D E R

P E R B H A R A T K U M A R P A N D Y A , M E M B E R

1. Present two revision petitions have been filed by the petitioner/complainant against the orders dated 03.11.2014 passed by.the State Commission in FA Nos. 14 and 15 of 2014 whereby orders dated 14.10.2013 and 17.10.2013 passed by the District Forum, Ferozepur in CC Nos. 203 and 204 of 2013 in favour of complainant, have been reversed by the State Commission. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner owns a transport company under the name and style of M/s. Guru Kripa Transport Company and also a petrol pump under the name and style of M/s. Brar Filling Station. Accordingly, Petitioner is owner of Oil tanker bearing Registration No. PB 05 N 9823. Petitioner purchased a motor vehicle policy in respect of the said vehicle for the period 25.04.2010 to 24.04.2011 for IDV of Rs. 3.8 lacs and another Policy of Carrier’s liability/transit on 04.05.2010 valid upto 03.05.2011 for a sum assured of Rs.7.5 lakhs and it was purchased for insurance of petrol and diesel being transported.

2. On 05.06.2010, the insured vehicle was carrying 15,000 Itr. of diesel and 5000 Itr. of petrol from Bathinda to M/s. Brar Filling Station in Jalalabad. The said insured vehicle reached the filling station and after about waiting for 2 hours, the sample testing and decantation process was started. However, due to rise in the temperature, the petrol accidentally got fire and the driver started the Tanker and took the same at a safe distance of 300/400 yards away from the petrol pump and then jumped out from the oil tanker. The tanker caught fire and was destroyed in the fire thereby destroying petrol and diesel also. It is the specific averment in the complaint that such presence of mind and bravery of the driver in driving away the vehicle and help avert a larger accident at the petrol-pump itself, was duly recognised and rewarded by the State Government. On 07.06.2010 the matter was reported to the police and police, after due Investigation, found the Incident to be correct. Fire incident was also reported to the fire service and a fire tender was sent for controlling the fire. Thereafter, the petitioner reported the matter to the respondent/OP insurer and also submitted the relevant documents and requested the insurer to pay the insured amount of Rs.7.5 lakhs. The spot and Final Surveyors were duly appointed and the Final Surveyor, after taking into account the spot survey report, assessed the loss of vehicle under the policy 0006 on total loss at Rs. 3.8 lacs and advised the insurer to dispose the salvage after cancelling the RC, which, as per surveyor, would fetch around Rs. 1.25 lacs. The claim of the petitioner was repudiated by the insurer vide letter dated 12.09.2011. The relevant reports, filed by the petitioner by way of IA/3462/2021 and the repudiation letter of the insurer are reproduced as under:

3. Since, as alleged in the complaint, the OP insurer was deficient in providing the services and had adopted unfair trade practices and had wrongly repudiated the claim of the petitioner after a gap of more than one year and three months from the date of accident, the petitioner filed separate complaints for each of the claim under policy 003 and 106 respectively before the District Forum, Ferozepur. After hearing learned counsel for both the parties and after going through record, District Forum recorded that there is deficiency on the part of the insurance company and passed an order in favour of the complainant. It appears that the survey report is only with regard to claim under the MV policy number 106 which claim the insurer repudiated on the ground that the driver’s license