Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Manjit Kaur and Others

Viney Mittal, J.—The present appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company challenging its liability to pay the compensation as awarded

by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalandhar vide award dated February 1,1997.

An accident had occurred on May 17, 1993 when Joga Singh, who was driving a scooter was returning back from his duties to his house. A

Truck bearing No. HR-29-C-4437 driven by Rachhpal Singh driver, hit the scooter. As a result thereof Joga Singh died. At the time of his death,

Joga Singh was 50 years of age and was working as Foreman with Doaba Milk Producers'' Cooperative Union, Jalandhar and was getting

monthly salary of Rs. 4,202. The deceased left behind his widow Manjit Kaur, his son Gurpreet Singh, three daughters Maninderjit Kaur,

Amandeep Kaur and Gurjit Kaur and his aged mother Bishan Kaur. The claimants initiated proceedings for compensation and a claim of Rs. 10

lacs was made before the learned Tribunal.

The learned Tribunal on the basis of the evidence available on the record found that the driver of the offending truck, Rachhpal Singh was

driving the truck rashly and negligently and had caused the accident on account of the aforesaid fact. Consequently, the claimants were held entitled

to compensation. The plea raised by the Insurance Company that the licence possessed by Rachhpal Singh was not a valid driving licence, was

also rejected by the learned Tribunal holding that the owner of the truck did not have any means to verify about the authenticity of the driving

licence. It was also noticed that driving licence had been renewed subsequently at the time of employment of the driver by the owner of the truck.

Consequently, it was held that Insurance Company was also liable jointly and severally along with the owner and driver of the truck. The

compensation was assessed at Rs. 3,65,000 payable to the claimants. Widow of the deceased was held entitled to Rs. 1,65,000 whereas Rs.

40,000 each were assessed as payable to the remaining claimants along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum.

As noticed above, the Insurance company has challenged the award with regard to the liability fastened upon it. I have heard the learned

Counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case.

5.. The plea raised by the Insurance Company that the licence of Rachhpal Singh driver was fake and the mere renewal would not convert the

same into a valid driving licence cannot be accepted since the controversy in question stands concluded by the law laid down by the Hon''ble

Supreme Court of India in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Swaran Singh and Others, . In the aforesaid judgment, it has been laid

down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court that mere absence, fake or invalid driving licence or disqualification of the driver for driving at the relevant

time, are not in themselves defences available to the insurer against either the insured or the third parties. In view of the law laid down by the Apex

Court in Swaran Singh''s case (supra), there is no merit in the appeal filed by the Insurance Company. The Insurance Company has not led any

evidence to show that the employer of the deriver was negligent in any manner in employing the driver Rachhpal Singh. Consequently, the

Insurance Company is held liable jointly and severally along with deriver an d owner of the offending truck.

As a result of the aforesaid discussion, the present appeal is devoid of any merit and the same is accordingly dismissed.