Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... this document shows that under the provisions of section 25 of motor vehicle act, 1988, the vehicle in question was got registered under a temporary registration and registration no.c.g.04 5651/tr was allotted to the vehicle. ..... this amounted to violation of the provisions of the motor vehicles act, 1988, which was considered a violation of the terms of the insurance policy by the insurance co. 2. ..... thus there was no violation of the provisions of the motor vehicle act, 1988 in this regard.? 6. ..... according to the appellant, section 43 of the motor vehicles act, also lays down that a temporary registration (as in this case) shall be valid only for a period of one month, except under certain circumstances allowed in the provision. ..... was rejected by the state commission with the following observations:- from the record, it appears that the vehicle was got registered in the office of the rto, raipur, vide document annexure-a4. ..... consequently, the revision petition is dismissed and the order of the chhattisgarh state consumer disputes redressal commission in appeal no.174 of 2011 is confirmed. ..... considering the appeal against the above order, the state commission noted that complete documents were not filed before the district forum, by the insurance company. ..... thus, the district forum as well as the state commission have both given a finding that there is nothing in the insurance policy which could exonerate the insurance co. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... the petitioner-company after considering the survey report and other relevant documents repudiated the claim of the respondent vide its letter dated 30.6.2011 stating that the vehicle in question did not have a permanent registration number and thus there was blatant violation of section 39 of the motor vehicles act, 1988. ..... in this context, we may note that that registration of the vehicle is a mandatory requirement of the law and the relevant provisions as contained in section 39 of the motor vehicles act, 1988 may be reproduced as under: - 39. ..... besides referring to the provisions of section 39 of the motor vehicles act, 1988, learned counsel has relied on two judgments of this commission in the cases of kaushalendrakumar mishra vs. ..... no person shall drive any motor vehicle and no owner of a motor vehicle shall cause or permit the vehicle to be driven in any public place or in any other place unless the vehicle is registered in accordance with this chapter and the certificate of registration of the vehicle has not been suspended or cancelled and the vehicle carries a registration mark displayed in the prescribed manner: provided that nothing in this section shall apply to a motor vehicle in possession of a dealer to such conditions as may be prescribed by the central government.? 5. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... , which reads thus: the policy covers use only under a permit within the meaning of the motor vehicles act, 1988 or such a carriage falling under sub-section (3) of section 66 of the motor vehicles act, 1988. ..... for the violation of the said provision, there is a penal liability provided under section 192 (a) of the motor vehicle act, 1988. 10. ..... section 66 (1) of the motor vehicles act, 1988 deals with necessity for permits? ..... on bare reading of the above, it is clear that under the insurance contract between the parties, the insurance cover extended to the insured is subject to the use of the vehicle only under a permit within the meaning of motor vehicle act, 1988. ..... further, section 39 of the motor vehicles act deals with necessity for registration of a motor vehicle and it prohibits driving of any motor vehicle at a public place unless the vehicle is registered. ..... (1) no owner of a motor vehicle shall use or permit the use of the vehicle as a transport vehicle in any public place whether or not such vehicle is actually carrying any passengers or goods save in accordance with the conditions of a permit granted or countersigned by a regional or state transport authority or any prescribed authority authorising him the use of the vehicle in that place in the manner in which the vehicle is being used?. 9. ..... the policy does not cover use for (a) organised racing, (b) pace making, (c ) reliability trails, (d) speed testing.? 11. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... considered opinion, the rightful claim of the complainant, could not be legally repudiated by op-1, as according to the proviso engrafted of section 43 of the motor vehicles act, 1988, even after the prescribed period, on payment of such fees, if any, as may be fixed by the registering authority, the ..... petitioner/insurance company denied the above allegations and stated that the claim was rightly repudiated since the respondent had violated both the terms and conditions of the insurance policy as well as the statutory provisions of the motor vehicles act which inter alia required that no person shall drive any motor vehicle unless it is registered in accordance with the motor vehicles act. ..... aggrieved by this order, petitioner/insurance company filed an appeal with the state commission which dismissed the same by observing as follows: even if, it is assumed, for the sake arguments, that the vehicle was allegedly given a temporary number on 01.12.2008, as per r-1, and the period of temporary registration expired on 30.12.2008, but it was not registered with the registering authority, when the theft of the same was committed, in our ..... counsel for petitioner further stated that the claim was rightly repudiated since the vehicle had not been registered on the date of the theft even though the period of temporary registration had expired since the vehicle had been bought on 01.01.2009 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... the main ground for the revision petition is that the state commission and the district forum below exercised its jurisdiction illegally and material irregularity by failing to appreciate that the present case clearly fall under section 185 (b) of the motor vehicles act, 1988. ..... and another (2012) 3 supreme court cases 563 has held; after referring various earlier decisions, taking very lenient view in condoning the delay, particularly, on the part of the government and government undertaking, this court observed as under; it needs no restatement at our hands that the object for fixing time-limit for litigation is based on public policy fixing a lifespan for legal remedy for the purpose of general ..... naturally introduces the consideration of all relevant facts and it is at this stage that diligence of the party or its bona fides may fall for consideration; but the scope of the enquiry while exercising the discretionary power after sufficient cause is shown would naturally be limited only to such facts as the court may regard as relevant.? ..... petitioner is directed to deposit the cost by way of demand draft in the name of consumer welfare fund as per rule 10 a of consumer protection rules, 1987, within four weeks from today. ..... the claim on account of impersonal machinery and inherited bureaucratic methodology of making several notes cannot be accepted in view of the modern technologies being used and available. ..... there is no hard and fast rule. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... thus, in plying the vehicle, without valid permit, particularly, from the state of haryana to delhi, was not only the breach of the policy condition but also in violation of the provision of section 66(1) of the motor vehicle act, 1988. ..... now, we advert to section 66(1) of the motor vehicles act, 1988, which runs as follows:- chapter v control of transport vehicles 66. ..... we find no force in this argument, in view of section 66 (1) of motor vehicles act, 1988. ..... therefore, there is a violation of the condition under section 66(1) of motor vehicle act, 1988. ..... delay in intimation deprives the insurance company of its legitimate right to get enquiry conducted into the alleged theft of vehicle and make an endeavor to recover the same that the insurance company could not be settled with the liability to pay compensation to the insured despite the fact that he had not complied with the terms of the policy. 14. ..... delay in informing the insurance company was fatal as it deprived the insurance company of its legitimate right to enquire into the alleged theft of vehicle and make an endeavor to recover the same. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... accident on 02.02.2006, the vehicle was being driven without registration, which is prohibited under section 39 of the motor vehicles act, 1988 and is also an offence under section 192 of the said act. ..... , the vehicle was being driven without registration, which is violation of section 192 of the motor vehicles act, 1988. 5. ..... however, repudiated by the opposite party on the ground that rajeev hetta, who was driving the vehicle at the time of the accident did not possess a valid and effective driving license and also, the vehicle had not been registered after the expiry of the temporary registration certificate on 11.01.2006. ..... petition has been filed under section 21(b) of the consumer protection act, 1986 against the order dated 22.08.2012 passed by the himachal pradesh state consumer disputes redressal commission, shimla (hereinafter referred to as state commission? ..... in view of the facts explained above, it is quite clear that the order of the state commission is based on a correct appreciation of the facts and documents on record and there is no infirmity or illegality ..... the main ground taken by the petitioner is that even when a vehicle is used without registration having been done, it does not amount to violation of any statutory requirement and in such a case, if the accident takes place, the insured is entitled to claim benefit ..... is no statutory bar in insuring the vehicle without registration and hence there is no bar in making payment of insured sum in the eventuality .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... the state commission held that the provisions of section 39 of the motor vehicles act, 1988, were mandatory. ..... the relevant provision, section 39 of the motor vehicles act, 1988, reads : no person shall drive any motor vehicle and no owner of a motor vehicle shall cause or permit the vehicle to be driven in any public place or in any other place, unless the vehicle is registered, in accordance with this chapter, and the certificate of registration of the vehicle has not been suspended or cancelled and the vehicle carries a registration mark, displayed in the prescribed manner. ..... provided, that, nothing in this section, shall apply to a motor vehicle, in possession of a dealer, subject to such conditions, as may be prescribed by the central government. ..... very much within the knowledge of the petitioner insurance company that the policy could not continue to be valid due to non-provision of the permanent registration number, they should have cancelled the policy in order to make the respondent take another policy or revalidate the same according to the policy conditions or whatever that was required to be done. ..... section 192 of the said act, pertains to the powers of the traffic police and the court. ..... it does not give any power to the insurance company to press this section into service, while dismissing the claim of the claimant/ complainant. ..... the insurance company does not enjoin the powers of traffic police. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... prithviraj had observed that the conditions contained in the section 149 of the motor vehicles act, 1988 related only to third party risk and claim. ..... under the motor vehicles act, 1988 and the rules etc. ..... in the order of the honble supreme court cited by the petitioner as reported in [2003 sar (civil) 602] it has been stated that the repudiation of a claim for damages for which the driver was not responsible in any manner, is not justified. ..... the facts of the present case make it clear that when the vehicle, in question, was coming from bareilly to haldwani on 1.1.2004, the tyre of the vehicle got burst and the driver lost control over the vehicle resulting the accident. ..... for the purpose of present case, the terms and conditions of the insurance policy have to be seen, which make it very clear that the insurer must have a valid driving licence. ..... the state commission allowed the said appeal and dismissed the complaint, holding that the licence of the driver of the vehicle in question was fake and hence, the insurer was not liable to pay the said claim as there was violation of the terms of the policy of insurance. ..... the surveyor appointed by the respondent assessed the damages to be rs.70,000/- whereas the petitioner claims that he spent rs.95,000/- for the repair of the vehicle, after returning the salvage to the opposite party. ..... before operating any vehicle, a driver is supposed to have reasonably good knowledge of the fitness of the vehicle, including the condition of the tyres. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
..... prithviraj had observed that the conditions contained in the section 149 of the motor vehicles act, 1988 related only to third party risk and claim. ..... under the motor vehicles act, 1988 and the rules etc. ..... in the order of the honble supreme court cited by the petitioner as reported in [2003 sar (civil) 602] it has been stated that the repudiation of a claim for damages for which the driver was not responsible in any manner, is not justified. ..... the facts of the present case make it clear that when the vehicle, in question, was coming from bareilly to haldwani on 1.1.2004, the tyre of the vehicle got burst and the driver lost control over the vehicle resulting the accident. ..... for the purpose of present case, the terms and conditions of the insurance policy have to be seen, which make it very clear that the insurer must have a valid driving licence. ..... the state commission allowed the said appeal and dismissed the complaint, holding that the licence of the driver of the vehicle in question was fake and hence, the insurer was not liable to pay the said claim as there was violation of the terms of the policy of insurance. ..... the surveyor appointed by the respondent assessed the damages to be rs.70,000/- whereas the petitioner claims that he spent rs.95,000/- for the repair of the vehicle, after returning the salvage to the opposite party. ..... before operating any vehicle, a driver is supposed to have reasonably good knowledge of the fitness of the vehicle, including the condition of the tyres. .....
Tag this Judgment!