New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Romesh Chand And Others

Sanjeev Kumar, J

This appeal by the New India Insurance Company Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as the „Insurance Company‟) is directed against the award dated 30.07.2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jammu (hereinafter referred to as the „Tribunal‟) in case file No.497/claim titled "Romesh Chand and others vs New India Insurance Co. Ltd., and others".

Before taking up the grounds of challenge urged in this appeal, it would be worthwhile to briefly notice few facts.

On 13.09.2001, the deceased Sanjay Kumar, who was riding on his scooter bearing registration No. JKE-560 and going from Jammu towards Kathua met with an accident near Samba Bus Stand. The accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle No. PB08V-1747 (Tata make Truck), which was being driven by one Manjit Singh, respondent No.3 in the claim petition. The accident was fatal in which the deceased lost his life. The respondents-claimants filed a claim petition before the Tribunal arraying driver, owner as also the appellant-Insurance Company with which the offending vehicle, at the relevant point of time, was insured.

On being put on notice, the claim petition was contested by the appellant-Insurance Company only.

On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues:

i. Whether an accident took place on 13.09.2001 at National Highway near LIC Building at Samba due to rash and negligent driving of Truck No. PB-08-1747 by the respondent in which Sanjay Kumar died ? OPP

ii. In case issue No.1 is proved in affirmative, whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation on account of the death of the deceased, if so, to what amount and from whom ? OPP

iii. Whether the driver of the offending vehicle was not having any valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident ? OPR-1

iv. Relief. OP Parties.

The claimant Romesh Chand appeared in the witness box to substantiate his claim raised in the claim petition. He also examined Narsingh Dayal and Romesh Kumar as his witnesses. No evidence was led by the appellant-Insurance Company in rebuttal. Accordingly, the Tribunal decided all the issues in favour of the claimants and against the appellant-Insurance Company and, thus, awarded a sum of Rs.4,11,000/- along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till liquidation.

The Tribunal also directed the appellant-Insurance Company to satisfy the award with liberty to recover the same from the owner. The impugned award has been assailed by the appellant, primarily, on the ground that the Tribunal fell in an error of law and fact in computing the compensation payable to the claimants and that the settled legal parameters laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in several judgments were ignored by the Tribunal. It was also contended that since the appellant-Insurance Company had taken a specific plea that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident and, therefore, the appellant-Insurance Company was not liable to indemnify the insured and pay any compensation to the claimants, but the said plea of the appellant-Insurance Company was not properly appreciated by the Tribunal and the Insurance Company was wrongly held liable to pay the compensation to the claimants, though with a liberty to recover the same from the insured.

Mr. Sharma, learned counsel, appearing for the respondents-claimants has vehemently refuted the arguments of learned senior counsel, appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company and stated that the appellant-Insurance Company had miserably failed to lead any evidence to discharge the burden of proving issue No.3.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, I am of the view that the award is perfectly legal and does not warrant any interference, that too, on the grounds urged by the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company. As a matter of fact, the amount of compensation awarded is slightly on the lower side. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company could not point out any illegality or error committed by the Tribunal in computing the compensation. He, however, strongly put forth his argument that since the driving licence of the driver of the offending vehicle was ex facie fake and, therefore, the Tribunal ought to have absolved the appellant-Insurance Company of its liability to indemnify the insured. I do not find any substance in the plea urged.

In the first place, I do not find any convincing evidence on record to demonstrate that the licence of the driver of the offending vehicle was ex facie fake and that the insured had all the reasons to know that it was fake. It is true that the insured has not entered the witness box to raise such plea, but nonetheless the Tribunal has held the appellant-Insurance Company entitled to recover the amount of compensation from the insured, of course, after disbursing it to the claimants.

Viewed from any angle, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned award. The appeal is, therefore, found to be without any merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. Registry to release the awarded amount in favour of the claimants-respondents in terms of the impugned award after proper verification.