REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.      1384              OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 901 of 2007)

National Insurance Co.   ..Appellant

Versus

M/s Sajjan Kumar Aggarwalla  ..Respondent

J U D G M E N T

Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J

1. Leave granted.

2. Challenge  in  this  appeal  is  to  the  order  passed  by  the  National

Consumer  Dispute  Redressal  Commission,  New  Delhi  (in  short  the

‘National Commission’).  Challenge before the National Commission was to

the  order  dated  25.7.2006  passed  by  State  Consumer  Dispute  Redressal

Commission,  Orissa  at  Cuttack  (in  short  the  ‘State  Commission’).  The

appeal before the State Commission was directed against the order passed

by District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Angul (in short the ‘District

Forum’).  

3. The controversy lies within a very narrow compass.  

The  respondent  filed  a  complaint  alleging  that  his  claim  for

compensation was repudiated without any valid reason. His case was that he

is  owner  of  Maruti  Car  No.QR-6/D/0121.  The  vehicle  was  the  subject

matter of insurance with the appellant. On 23.2.2001 the vehicle met with

an accident in the State of Chattisgarh and it was badly damaged.  On being

informed, appellant deputed a Surveyor to conduct spot survey. According

to  the claimant  there  was  an agreement  that  the claimant  would  be  paid

Rs.1,95,000/- for the damage of the vehicle. But the appellant repudiated the

claim on the ground that the driver who was driving the vehicle did not have

an  effective  driving  license  at  the  time  of  accident.  Before  the  District

Forum  a copy of  the  driving  license   bearing  No.1149 dated  22.7.1999

issued by the licensing authority, Dhenkanal was filed by respondent. It was

stated  that  he was issued with  light  motor vehicle license on 22.10.1998

2

corresponding to learning license No.2081. On 1.8.2000 he was issued with

learning  license  and  was  authorized  to  drive  heavy  goods  vehicle  and

passenger vehicle. Requisition fees has been paid and, therefore, the driver

had a valid driving license. This plea was accepted by the District Forum.

The State Commission did not accept the appeal of the appellant on

the ground that in view of the records produced by the respondent, there is

no  basis  for  repudiating  the  claim.  The  National  Commission  by  the

impugned  order  held  that  in  view  of  the  finding  recorded  by  the  State

Commission  which  had  verified  the  driving  license  of  the  driver

Sachidananda Nayak, there was no scope for any interference.  

4. It is pointed out by learned counsel for the appellant that a specific

investigation  was carried out  by the  Investigator  i.e.  one Mahesh Kumar

Sahu who was appointed to verify the license in question.  The investigator

found  that  it  was  in  the  name of  somebody else.  Therefore,  the  District

Forum  as  well  as  the  State  Commission  and  the  National  Commission

should not have granted relief to the respondent.  

3

5. Learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand submitted that

the details supplied by the insured clearly indicated that driver had a valid

driving license.  

6. The controversy lies, as noted above, within a very narrow compass

as  to  the  person  to  whom  D.L.  No.1149  was  issued.  According  to

respondent  it  was  issued  to  Sachidananda  Nayak.  But  according  to  the

information supplied by investigator of the appellant-company the license in

question  was  issued  to  one  Santosh  Kumar  Maharana.  In  view  of  the

aforesaid  background we feel it appropriate to set aside the impugned order

of the District Forum, State Commission and the National Commission and

remit the matter to the District Forum to verify the necessary data by calling

for records from the licensing authority. The parties shall be permitted to

place materials in support of their respective claim.  

7. The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent.   

………………………………….J. (Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT)

………………………………….J.

4

(ASOK KUMAR GANGULY)

New Delhi, March 03, 2009

5