AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
COMPLAINANT/Petitioner has filed the present Revision Petition against the judgment and order dated 14.05.07 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab (in short, ''the State Commission'') in appeal No. 1194/01 whereby the State Commission has set aside the order passed by the District Forum directing the Respondent Insurance Company to pay the claim amount as assessed by its surveyor to the Petitioner/COMPLAINANT along with interest @ 12% p.a starting after four months of filing the claim till realization within a period of one month. FACTS :- COMPLAINANT/Petitioner got her 1995 model truck bearing registration No. PB-08-P-2695 comprehensively insured with the Respondent insurance company for Rs.5,53,000/- for the period from 16.10.97 to 15.10.98. During the subsistence of the policy, the truck met with an accident on 16.08.98 and was badly damaged. FIR was lodged. Respondent Insurance Company was intimated about the accident. On receiving intimation, Respondent appointed Laxmi Narain Vyas, Engineer, Surveyor and Assessor to conduct the spot survey and assess the loss. Petitioner lodged a claim for Rs.3,95,000/- with the Respondent which was repudiated on the ground that the driver of the truck did not have a valid and effective driving licence on the date of accident. That the original driving licence on the basis of which renewal was granted was fake. That the renewal of fake licence could not cure inherent fatality. Aggrieved by this, Petitioner filed the complaint before the District Forum.
RESPONDENT, on being served, filed its written statement resisting the complaint and justifying the repudiation on the ground that the driver of the vehicle, in question was not holding a valid and effective driving licence at the relevant time. That the driving licence was issued by the Motor Licencing Authority, Hamirpur. On verification from the concerned Transport Authority the same was found to be fake. That there was no deficiency in service on their part and complaint was liable to be dismissed. District Forum came to the conclusion that after the valid renewal of the licence, the original licence had lost its significance inasmuch as on the date of accident the driver was holding a validly renewed licence. Complaint was allowed and the Respondent was directed to pay the claim amount assessed by the Surveyor to the Petitioner along with interest @ 12% p.a. starting after four months of filing the claim till its realization.
Respondent, being aggrieved, filed the appeal before the State Commission. State Commission relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Laxmi Narain Dhut '' (2007)3 SCC 700, allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the District Forum and dismissed the complaint. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner contends that the Petitioner had exercised all due diligence and checked the license of the driver before appointing him as a Driver and when a driver produces driving licence before the employer, the employer is not supposed to make a probe as to whether the licence renewed by the Competent Authority based on the original licence was a fake one or not. On the other hand, Counsel for the Respondent relying upon the judgement of the Supreme Court in Laxmi Narain Dhut''s case (Supra) contended that in own damage claim, where the original licence is fake, renewal thereof cannot cure inherent fatality.
IN Laxmi Narain Dhut''s case (supra), Hon''ble Supreme Court has held that in own damage cases the insurance company is not liable to reimburse the loss to the insured if the driver of the vehicle did not hold a valid and effective driving licence. That renewal of fake licence could not cure the inherent fatality. Relevant observations of the Hon''ble Supreme Court read as under : "36. The inevitable conclusion therefore is that the decision in Swaran Singh''s case (supra) has no application to own damage cases. The effect of fake license has to be considered in the light of what has been stated by this Court in New INdia Assurance Co., Shimla v. Kamla and Ors. Once the license is a fake one the renewal cannot take away the effect of fake license. It was observed in Kamla''s case (supra) as follows: 12. As a point of law we have no manner of doubt that a fake licence cannot get its forgery outfit stripped off merely on account of some officer renewing the same with or without knowing it to be forged. Section 15 of the Act only empowers any Licensing Authority to "renew a driving licence issued under the provisions of this Act with effect from the date of its expiry". No Licensing Authority has the power to renew a fake licence and, therefore, a renewal if at all made cannot transform a fake licence as genuine. Any counterfeit document showing that it contains a purported order of a statutory authority would ever remain counterfeit albeit the fact that other persons including some statutory authorities would have acted on the document unwittingly on the assumption that it is genuine. 37. As noted above, the conceptual difference between third party right and own damage cases has to be kept in view. INitially, the burden is on the insurer to prove that the license was a fake one. Once it is established the natural consequences have to flow. 38. IN view of the above analysis the following situations emerge: 1. The decision in Swaran Singh''s case (supra) has no application to cases other than third party risks. 2. Where originally the license was a fake one, renewal cannot cure the inherent fatality. 3. IN case of third party risks the insurer has to indemnify the amount and if so advised to recover the same from the insured. 4. The concept of purposive interpretation has no application to cases relatable to Section 149 of the Act. The High Courts/Commissions shall now consider the matter afresh in the light of the position in law as delineated above."
No inference is called for as the order passed by the State Commission is in consonance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Laxmi Narain Dhut''s case (supra). It is well settled law that valid renewals cannot validate a fake licence. If a fake licence is renewed, it will still remain fake.
FOR the reasons stated above, we do not find any merit in this Revision Petition and dismiss the same. No order as to costs.