Sohan has a truck which was driven by a driver, Shyam, but Shyam did not have valid licence for driving the truck. The truck was insured with an insurance company. On the way, all of a sudden the truck started burning. S

CS Executive · Economic and Commercial Laws · PYQS · December 2016
Sohan has a truck which was driven by a driver, Shyam, but Shyam did not have valid licence for driving the truck. The truck was insured with an insurance company. On the way, all of a sudden the truck started burning. Sohan filed a claim with the insurance company. The insurance company repudiated the claim on the ground that driver of the said truck did not have valid driving licence. The truck owner pleaded that the claim is not related to 'driving' of the truck but the insurance company did not change its earlier decision. Sohan filed a complaint with the District Consumers' Disputes Redressal Forum. Will Sohan succeed? Discuss with reference to decided case, if any.

Answer & Explanation:

The pleading of the truck owner Mr. Sohan is justified and sustainable. The valid licence for driving has no relevance or connection with the 'fire' which took all of sudden in the truck, if the fire has occurred due to mechanical failure and not due to any act or omission of the driver. Thus the Insurance Company cannot repudiate the claim because of valid driving licence. Hence Mr. Sohan, truck owner shall succeed. The Supreme Court in the case of Jitender Kumar V/s Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. pronounced the decision in favour of the claimant and held or laid down the said principle for deciding the claim relating to lack of valid driving license.

Topics: Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Open in Interactive Practice Hub · Full Practice Hub · Chapter Weightage · More in this subject

Related Questions in this Topic