Punjab-Haryana High Court
United India Insurance Company Limited vs Lajwant Kaur And Others on 20 January, 2014
Author: Jaspal Singh
Bench: Jaspal Singh
FAO No.19 of 1998 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
Date of Decision: January 20, 2014
1.
FAO No.19 of 1998
United India Insurance Company Limited ..... APPELLANT
VERSUS
Lajwant Kaur and others ..... RESPONDENTS
...
2.
FAO No.20 of 1998
United India Insurance Company Limited ..... APPELLANT
VERSUS
Manjit Singh and others ..... RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH
...
PRESENT: - Mr. Kuldip Joshi, Advocate for
Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate for the appellant.
None for the respondent.
. . .
Jaspal Singh, J
1. By this common judgment both the aforementioned appeals shall be decided together since they are out-come of the one and the same award dated August 12, 1997 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalandhar.
2. Shortly put, the facts necessary for the disposal of these appeals are that on December 11, 1993, Manjit Singh- Thakral Rajeev 2014.01.27 13:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh FAO No.19 of 1998 -2- claimant and his wife Lajwant Kaur were going on scooter and when they reached in the area of Patial on the Jalandhar-Pathankot Road, a truck bearing No.PAR-8632 being driven rashly and negligently by Gurmail Singh-respondent No.1 came from the opposite direction, went out of control and struck against their scooter as a result of which they both sustained multiple injuries.
3. They both preferred petitions claiming compensation which were disposed of vide impugned award dated August 12, 1997 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalandhar, holding that the driver of the truck was not holding a valid driving licence at the time of accident but the insurance company-respondent No.3/appellant was also jointly and severely liable to pay the amount of compensation so awarded.
4. Feeling aggrieved, insurance-company preferred these appeals which were admitted for hearing.
5. The sole question which requires determination in the case in hand is whether the insurance company can be fastened with liability to make payment of compensation in case the driving licence held by the driver of the offending vehicle is found to be fake or that the insurance company is entitled to recover the amount of compensation so paid to the victim or his legal heirs in pursuance of the award passed by the Tribunal? Thakral Rajeev 2014.01.27 13:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh FAO No.19 of 1998 -3-
6. In the case in hand, a categoric finding has been recorded by the learned Tribunal that the driver of the offending vehicle namely Gurmail Singh was not holding a valid driving licence at the time of accident which has not been challenged by the claimant or the owner as well as the driver. Even the owner of the offending truck did not appear in the witness box to state that he took adequate care to see that the driver had a valid and appropriate licence to drive the vehicle. Such a question arose before the Hon'ble Apex Court in case Ishwar Chandra v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.; 2007(2) R.C.R. (Civil) 370 and it was held that in case the driver of the vehicle did not have a licence at all, the liability to make payment of compensation fell on the owner since it was his obligation to take adequate care to see that the driver had an appropriate licence to drive the vehicle. Similarly, in cases National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. G. Mohd. Vani & Ors; 2004 ACJ 1424 and National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Candingeddawa & Ors.; 2005 ACJ 40, it was held that if the driver of the offending vehicle did not have a valid driving licence, then the Insurance Company after paying the compensation amount would be entitled to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle.
7. In case Jawahar Singh v. Bala Jain and others; Thakral Rajeev 2014.01.27 13:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh FAO No.19 of 1998 -4- 2011 (3) R.C.R. (Civil) 269, the motorcycle was being driven by a minor without holding any valid driving licence at the time of accident and it was observed by the Apex Court that the Insurance company had been rightly relieved of the liability of payment of compensation to the claimants and such liability had been correctly fixed on the owner of the motorcycle.
8. Accordingly, fixing the liability to make payment of compensation jointly and severely vide impugned award dated August 12, 1997 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalandhar, is illegal and against the settled principles.
9. In the light of above discussion, both the appeals are accepted with no order as to costs and the Insurance company- appellant is absolved from of its liability and in case the payment of compensation had already been made by the appellant to the claimants, it shall have the right to recover the same from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle jointly and severely.
10. The impugned award dated August 12, 1997 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalandhar stands, accordingly, modified.
(Jaspal Singh)
January 20, 2014 Judge
rajeev
Thakral Rajeev
2014.01.27 13:47
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh