The insurer's failure to prove a fundamental breach justifies the continuation of liability under the insurance policy despite the driver's learner's license.

ORDER

Instant appeal is directed against the order dated 27.04.2023 passed in consumer complaint No. 40/2022 by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P. (hereinafter to be referred to as the ‘learned District Commission’).

Brief facts of Case

2. The facts, in brief, of the case of the complainant/respondent (hereinafter to be referred to as the ‘complainant’) are that, complainant is a registered owner of the vehicle No. HP-46-2758 (Alto car) (hereinafter to be referred to as the ‘ill fated car’) which was insured with the appellant/Insurance Company (hereinafter to be referred to as the ‘appellant’) for the period w.e.f.17.07.2020 to 16.07.2023.

3. It is the case of the complainant that on 03.10.2020 at about 1:30 p.m., his son Akshay Kumar having a learner’s licence was driving the ill fated car and one Chaukas Ram who is his paternal uncle was inside the ill fated car, which met with an accident at Gured, Near Kali Mata Temple, Tehsil Bharmour, District Chamba, H.P.

4. The matter with regard to the accident was reported by the complainant to the appellant being Insurance Company and also to the police of Police Station, Bharmour. The police entered a rapat No. 031/2020 dated 03.10.2022. The appellant deputed surveyors to the spot who inspected the spot but thereafter, the appellant did not pay the requisite claim to the complainant resulting into filing of the complaint No. 40/2022 before the learned District Commission as repudiation of the claim resulted into deficiency in service on the part of the appellant.

5. The averment made in the complaint were resisted and contested by the appellant thereby raising preliminary objections qua non-maintainability of the complaint; there being no deficiency in service; complainant having not approached the Forum with clean hands; concealment of material facts; the ill fated car having been plied in contravention of Rule 3 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules , 1989 (hereinafter to be referred to as the ‘Central Rules’) and conditions of policy as Shri Akshay Kumar was holding only learner’s licence and was alone in the car at the time of accident and as such, the claim has rightly been repudiated and estoppel, inter-alia, certain contentions having been put forth on merits. On merits, the facts that the ill fated car having been comprehensively insured with the appellant; complainant being registered owner of the ill fated car and jurisdiction of the District Forum have been admitted. The accident of the ill-fated car having been taken place at Gured, Near Kali Mata Temple is also the admitted fact. It is only the contention of the appellant that in fact when the accident was reported, it thrice deputed the surveyors to the spot and M/s S.A. Investigating and Consulting Agency, Pathankot being surveyor have recorded the statements of the complainant, his son Akshay Kumar, who was driving the ill fated car and one Chaukas Ram and came to the conclusion that at the time of accident in the ill fated car, Akshay Kumar was alone which is violation of Rule 3 of the Central Rules and as such, the claim of the complainant was rightly repudiated. Other averments made in the complaint have been denied being wrong and incorrect and prayer has been made for dismissal of the complaint.

6. Complainant preferred the rejoinder whereby the averments made in the reply by the appellant have been denied being wrong and incorrect and that of the complaint are re-asserted and re-affirmed.

7. The learned District Forum on analysis of the evidence on