Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
National Insurance Co Ltd vs Tulsi Ram & Others on 8 December, 2011
Author: Mohammad Rafiq
Bench: Mohammad Rafiq
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.1951/2000 National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Tulsi Ram & Ors. Date of order : 8/12/2011. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Tripurari Sharma for the appellant. Shri Jinendra Jain ) Shri Akshat Choudhary for Shri Virendra Agarwal) for the respondents.
****** The insurance company has approached this Court against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dated 28.5.1999, which has awarded a sum of Rs.2,02,500 in a death claim to the claimant-respondents. The accident took place involving the truck insured with the appellant-insurance company. The defence of the appellant-insurance company before the Tribunal was that while the accident took place on 11.8.1994, but the validity of the licence of the driver expired on 7.7.1994 and the licence was not renewed thereafter. In support of his defence, the insurance company adduced the evidence. Reference in this connection is made to the statement of NAW-1 Kanhaiya Lal, the Branch Manager of the Mathura Branch of the insurance company, who has stated that truck no.RNA 5155 was insured with them from 30.5.1994 to 29.5.1995. The policy of insurance was exhibited as NA-1. The driver of the truck at the time of accident was Movin, but he did not have valid licence as on the date of accident. The condition of having driving licence is incorporated in the policy. The licence was valid only upto 7.7.1994.
Shri Tripurari Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant has argued that finding that has been recorded by the Tribunal on this aspect is wholly perverse and erroneous. The Tribunal has erred in law in holding that even if the licence is not renewed, the insurance company would still be liable to indemnify the owner for payment of compensation. Learned counsel in support of his arguments relied on the judgements of Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Vidhyadhar Mahariwala & Ors.-2008 ACJ 2860 and National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Kusum Rai-2006 ACJ 1336 (SC) and argued that in those cases the Supreme Court has held that if the driver did not possess the valid licence as on the date of accident, the insurance company cannot be held liable to pay the compensation.
Shri Jinendra Jain, learned counsel for the respondent-owner opposed the appeal and submitted that the matter was decided ex-parte against the owner and, therefore, the insurance company was required to also prove that the licence was neither renewed, nor renewal application was filed within the period of 30 days as per the requirement of Section 15(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act. It was also argued that as per the requirement of law, the insurance company has not to prove the breach of condition of policy, but also that such breach was within the knowledge of the owner. If the owner has taken due care in engaging a driver with licence and the driver does not get the same renewed timely, owner cannot be held responsible for such a negligence on the part of the driver.
On hearing learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, I find that the law on this subject is now quite clear following the aforesaid two judgements in Vidhyadhar Mahariwala and Kusum Rai, supra.
In view of above, the finding of the learned Tribunal on this aspect cannot be sustained. The appeal therefore deserves to be succeed and is accordingly allowed. The insurance company is exonerated of its liability.
(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J.
RS/-