The absence of a valid fitness certificate for a transport vehicle constitutes a fundamental breach of insurance policy, justifying claim repudiation under the Motor Vehicles Act.

ORDER

PER: - JUSTICE GAUTAM CHOURDIYA, PRESIDENT

This appeal is filed against order dated 30.10.2024 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Raipur (C.G.) (hereinafter called “District Commission” for short) in complaint case No.CC/2014/404, whereby the complaint was dismissed observing that on the date of accident the insured vehicle was not having valid and effective fitness certificate and as per Section 56 of the Motor Vehicles Act for want of fitness, registration of a transport vehicle becomes ineffective and invalid.

2. In nutshell the facts of the case are that the complainant/ appellant is the registered owner of Maruti Ecco (Ambulance) bearing registration No.CG-04-DM-3934, which was got insured from the opposite party / respondent for the period 28.05.2013 to 27.05.2014. As per averments made in the complaint on 02.12.2013 while the ambulance was taking a patient along with three other people to village Chikhli (Mal Kharoda) from Medicine Hospital Raipur, when at 11 pm, on the main road of Tusar, Tankeshwar Prasad Chandra, S/o. Balmukund Chandra, had spread his paddy on the main road to thresh it, obstructing the traffic and the movement of vehicles was going on over the paddy. Due to this, like other vehicles, when the complainant/ appellant also drove his vehicle over the paddy crop, the paddy panicles along with straw got stuck in the wheel and smoke started coming out. The complainant/ appellant immediately stopped the vehicle and got the patient and other passengers out of the ambulance, meanwhile the entire vehicle was burnt to ashes, due to which the complainant/ appellant suffered a loss of about Rs.4,00,000/-. He immediately informed the police station Jaijaipur of Janjgir District about the incident. On the basis of which a crime under sections 283, 337 and 427 of the IPC was registered against the owner of the paddy, Tankeshwar Prasad Chandra. The complainant/ appellant immediately submitted his insurance claim with the opposite party / respondent but the insurance company rejected the claim on 19.02.2014 on the basis of absence of fitness certificate, without examining it on merits. Alleging which as deficiency in service complaint was filed before the District Commission.

3. The opposite party/ respondent in its written version has refuted the allegations leveled in the complaint and averred that the complainant/ appellant has got the said vehicle insured under Commercial Vehicle because the said vehicle is actually an ambulance and a transport vehicle. According to the vehicle registration, the gross vehicle weight of the said ambulance is 908 kg and the load capacity of this vehicle is for seating less than 6 persons, hence it is a "motor cab". It was also averred that as per notification of the Government of India in the erstwhile Ministry of Surface Transport No. S.O. 451(E), dated the 19th June, 1992 an ambulance is classified as a transport vehicle. It is clear from the document of the First Information Report of Crime Number-305/13 dated-03.12.2013 registered before the police station Jaijaipur district Janjgir, at the time of incident of loss to the said vehicle, a patient and his family members were being transported on a public road and the incident was invited by deliberately driving the vehicle at a place blocked by paddy and paddy straw. For this, the police station has registered a crime under Sections- 283, 336 and 427. On examining the registration book presented by the complainant/ appellant after the accident, it was found that he had also converte