National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Sheela Gupta

- THIS is an appeal against an order dated 21.1.1993 of District Forum, Lakhimpur Kheri in case No. 28/1991 given after the matter had been remanded by the State Commission for reconsideration to it.

RESPONDENT Smt. Sheela Gupta had a small Motor Truck (Vehicle) insured with the appellant National Insurance Company Ltd. The vehicle met with an accident on 28.7.90 during the currency of the insurance policy and it was badly damaged. The report about the accident was lodged at Police Station, Katra (Tilhar) Shahjahanpur. The vehicle was being driven at the time of the accident by Anup Kumar who in the First Information Report was mentioned as the son of Saraswati Prasad. The claim for the loss to the vehicle for a sum of Rs. 1,49,120/- was put forward by the respondent. The National Insurance Company (appellant before us), obtained reports of two surveyors Sri S. Kumar and Sri J. P. Berry who found that the vehicle had been damaged. One of them, Sri Berry, proposed that the total amount Rs. Sri Berry, proposed that the total amount Rs. 35000/- be paid. National Insurance Company Ltd., however, did not accept the claim and refused to pay any amount what soever on the ground that the vehicle was being driven by a person who was not authorised as he had no valid driving licence. According to the Insurance Company Sri Anup Kumar son of Saraswati Prasad was not issued, any driving licence by the office of the Regional Transport office, Sitapur. The licence was issued in the name of one Anup Kumar son of Ram Prasad who was a resident of Lakhimpur Kheri.

The case of the complainant-respondent which had been accepted by the District Forum is that Anup Kumar son of Saraswati Prasad was a same person as Anup Kumar son of Ram Prasad and that Saraswati Prasad and Ram Prasad was the name of same person who had these aliases.

BOTH the parties adduced evidence in the form of affidavits and documents in support of their respective cases. After noticing the entire evidence of both parties the Distt. Forum has concluded that the vehicle was being driven by Anup Kumar son of Saraswati Prasad alias Ram Prasad who had a valid driving licence. On this finding the Distt. Forum has accepted the claim and awarded a sum or Rs. 35000/- by way of reimbursement for the damage caused to the vehicle in addition to a sum of Rs. 2000/- as compensation for the deficiency in service due to delay in the settlement of the matter. It has been urged before us by Sri Rajes Nath, appearing from the Insurance Company, that the finding recorded by the Distt. Forum was not sustainable. We have gone through the evidence in the light of what has been said by the District Forum and urged before us by Sri Rajesh Nath. We feel that the view taken by the District Forum was a plausible one and though, by finding non-existing faults in the evidence adduced on behalf of the claimant it may be possible to urge that Anup Kumar son of Saraswati Prasad was different from Anup Kumar son of Ram Prasad yet on a reasonable view of the material brought by the parties on the record before the District Forum the finding that Saraswati Prasad and Ram Prasad were the names and alias of the same person does not merit interference. We are not inclined to a view different from what has been taken by the District Forum and dismiss the appeal but leave the parties to bear their own costs.

LET a copy of this order be sent to District Forum, Lakhimpur Kheri alongwith its original file in case No.28/1991. Copies be made available to parties as per Rules. Appeal dismissed.