Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: valid driving license in National Insurance Company Ltd. Thr. ... vs Smt. Meena And 4 Others on 18 June, 2024Matching Fragments
17. Ms. Pooja Arora Advocate holding brief of Mr. S.C. Gulati, learned counsel appearing for the insurance company has vehemently argued that once learned Tribunal found that there was no valid driving license with the driver of the Tanker, there could not have been any occasion for the learned Tribunal to direct the insurance company to pay the compensation awarded to the claimants.
18. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants in F.A.F.O. No. 148 of 2012 has vehemently argued that the learned Tribunal in its order and award dated 11.11.2011 has recorded a categorical finding that the driving license of the driver of the Tanker has not been produced by either of the parties and therefore, it is presumed that the driver was not having valid driving license and once there is such presumption that amounts to breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy therefore, the liability for payment of compensation cannot be fastened on the insurer.
21. I have considered the rival arguments advanced by the learned counsels appearing for the parties.
22. This Court first proceeds to consider the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants in F.A.F.O. No. 148 of 2012. This Court finds that the insurer while filing F.A.F.O. No. 148 of 2012 has challenged the order and award dated 11.11.2011 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in M.A.C.P. No. 190 of 2009 on the ground that learned Tribunal in its order has recorded categorical finding that either of the parties could not produce the driving license of the driver of the offending vehicle i.e. Tanker, therefore presumption is that the driver of the Tanker was not having valid driving license, accordingly in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of United India Insurance Company Limited (supra) the liability for payment of compensation could not have been fastened on the insurer.
23. It has further been argued on behalf of the insurer that once it is admitted by the learned Tribunal that driver of the Tanker was not having valid driving license, that amounts to breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy and accordingly insurer cannot be held responsible for payment of compensation to the claimants.
24. I find that learned Tribunal in its order and award dated 11.11.2011 has recorded a finding that the driver of the Tanker does not possess valid driving license and has directed the insurer to pay compensation awarded under the award to the claimants and further insurer has been given right of recovery of the compensation paid by it from the insured i.e. owner of the Tanker.
27. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its judgment rendered in the case of S. Iyyapan (supra) has categorically held that if the driver of the vehicle does not possess valid driving license, insurer is liable to pay compensation to the claimants and further it can recover the amount of compensation from the insured i.e. owner of the vehicle. In the present case learned Tribunal in its order and award dated 11.11.2011 has recorded a finding that the driver of the Tanker was not having valid driving license and thereby has directed the insurer to pay compensation to the claimants and further has given right of recovery to insurer for recovery of the compensation paid to the claimants from the insured i.e. owner of the Tanker.