Per Justice G.D. Sharma, J. (Oral) 1. Through the medium of this appeal order dated 03.02.2006 passed by the Learned Divisional Forum Jammu (hereinafter to be referred to as the Forum) has been challenged. The Forum has held that on the admitted facts the loss was caused to the insured Bolero bearing Engine No. DD14633881 while on its way to Srinagar for its delivery at a place on the national highway known as Batote and the said Bolero was insured for its risk with the respondents under policy No. 420803/6303535 which was valid at that time. The allegation was that the accident was caused because of the rash and negligent driving of petrol tanker bearing No. JK02G/5173. In the complaint, the appellant herein had claimed insurance claims for Rs 73713.25 for the cost incurred for getting repaired the above said insured Bolero as well as the damages in the amount of Rs. 50,000/- for causing inordinate delay for settling the claim. Claim was repudiated on 25.06.2003 and the complaint was filed on 30.07.2003. The Learned Forum has held that the accident was caused by rash and negligent driving of tanker at a public place and the complaint was triable by the Motor Vehicles Tribunal constituted under section 165 of the Motor Vehicles Act and not by a Consumer Forum. The respondents in the preliminary objections had raised plea in the written version that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the respondents who had already repudiated the claim. It was also pleaded that the complaint was hit by clause IMP-61 governing the insurance policy. It was also pleaded that complaint was time barred. The order has been inter alia challenged in the appeal on the following grounds: (i) The learned Forum has wrongly placed reliance in the law laid down in the AIR 1995 SC 1384 . (ii) Clause IMP-61 as had been pleaded in the written version had no application to the facts of the present case. (iii) The claim of the appellant fell within the terms and conditions of the contract of Insurance and that aspect had not been taken in account by the Learned Forum. (iv) The complaint was not time barred. (v) That the claim of the appellant was registered by the respondents and process was started to settle it. It could not be repudiated at later stage. (iv) The complaint was not time barred. (v) That the claim of the appellant was registered by the respondents and process was started to settle it. It could not be repudiated at later stage. (vi) The claim was not settled for more than 2 years and its repudiation was not legally justified. 2. The record reveals that the counsel of the appellant Mr. W.S. Nargal is not serious in the prosecution of the appeal as he has not been personally appearing but occasionally his presence is recorded in proxy by some advocates. This is a very old appeal pending for disposal under R.10 of the J&K Consumer Protection Rule's 1987; we are deciding the appeal on merits. Mr. Baldev Singh advocate at the outset has stated that the appeal is misconceived as sit is without any merit because of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in AIR 1995 Supreme Court 1384 wherein it has been held that provisions of Motor Vehicles Act which is a special law shall prevail over the Consumer Protection Act for the claim arising out of accident and it cannot be adjudicated by the Consumer Forum. He has also contented that the cause of the accident is rash and negligent driving of the Petrol Tanker bearing Registration No.JK02G-5173. The appellant does not fall within the definition of the Consumer as defined under the Act. He has also contended that there is a breach of clause IMP 61 of the Contract of Insurance. 3. We have considered his contentions. They have legal force. We do not find any illegality or other infirmity in the impugned order. Rather, the impugned order has detailed discussion of all the material facts of the case. The other grounds raised in the memo of appeal are of redundant nature and need no discussion. In this view of the matter, we uphold the impugned order and dismiss the appeal with cost of Rs. 5,000/-. The appeal is consigned to record and record of the Forum be returned at once.