ORDER

(Per: Ms. Kumkum Rani, President):

1. This appeal has been directed against judgment and order dated 02.08.2022 passed by learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Udham Singh Nagar in consumer complaint No. 49 of 2018 styled as Sh. Mehboob Vs. Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd., wherein and whereby the complaint was dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the case are as such that the complainant had purchased a vehicle bearing registration No. UK04-CA-7536 for his self-employment, which was insured with the opposite party under policy No. 253801/31/2016/4443 valid from 01.02.2016 to 31.01.2017 for a sum of Rs. Four Lacs. The insured vehicle (in short ‘the subject vehicle’) was proceeding for Ramnagar for the purpose of taking goods alongwith driver, cleaner and two labours. The subject vehicle met with an accident on the way due to sudden coming of an animal and the driver of the subject vehicle lost his control over it, resulting damages in the body and cabin of the subject vehicle. Information of the occurrence was immediately forwarded to the Insurance Company - opposite party as well as police station Bhatroj Khan, District Almora, whereupon a G.D. at Sl. No. 20 in P.S. Bhatroj Khan was registered on dated 23.05.2016. The opposite party also deputed surveyor for inspection and making survey of the subject vehicle. The complainant handed over all the original bills of repairs to the Insurance Company, which amounts to Rs. 2,83,900/-. After completing all the formalities, the Insurance Company repudiated his claim vide order dated 31.03.2018. Thereafter, the complainant dispatched a legal notice dated 04.01.2018 to the Insurance Company through his advocate, but no reply was given by them. The opposite party deliberately rejected the claim unnecessary taking plea of violation of terms and conditions and such act comes within purview of unfair trade practice. Due to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, the complainant has to suffer mental agony and financial loss, therefore, a complaint was submitted before the District Commission, Udham Singh Nagar.

3. The Insurance Company - opposite party has submitted its written statement alleging that the complainant did not come with clean hands and concealed the relevant facts from the answering opposite party. It is further stated in the written statement that there was the excessive persons available in the subject vehicle, violating the terms and conditions of the insurance policy, therefore, for violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy, the answering opposite party cannot be held responsible. The complainant has failed to substantiate the deficiency on the part of the answering opposite party. It is further alleged that after receiving the information of the occurrence from the complainant, it was found that there was four persons travelling inside the subject vehicle. According to the insurance policy, the subject vehicle was to be driven with two persons including driver, but there was availability of four persons inside the subject vehicle, which substantiate the fact that there was a gross violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. On such ground, the claim of the complainant was repudiated. Accordingly, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4. The District Commission after hearing both the parties and after taking into consideration the facts and evidence on record, has passed the impugned judgment and order dated 02.08.2022 in the above terms.

5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order of the District Commission, the complainant has preferred the present appeal as appellant alleging that the impugned judgment and order is against the facts, evidence and material available on record. The District Commission has not considered the evidence available on record. As per G.D. and claim form, the driver lost his control due to sudden coming of an animal in