Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. vs Smt.Guddi @ Raja Beti & Ors. on 27 September, 2017
4. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company, on the
other hand, submits that the owner and the driver are not
represented before this Court. He has pointed out from the
record that the owner of the offending vehicle, namely,
Banwarilal had not bothered to examine himself before the
Claims Tribunal so as to say that he had seen the driving
licence of driver Mahendra and it was not found to be fake. In
fact, the defendants have examined only Officer of the
Insurance Company, Official from RTO Gwalior and Official
from RTO Jhansi. Therefore, in view of these facts on record,
in the light of the law laid down by this High Court in the case
of Oriental Insurance Company v. Virendra Singh
Tomar & Others as reported in MACD 2010 (1) MP 45,
since the owner of the vehicle had failed to put up any case
that he was not knowing about the driver not holding a valid
licence at the time of handing over of the vehicle, this Court is
of the opinion that the appeal filed by the Insurance Company
5
Misc. Appeal Nos.765/2003 and 916/2003
deserves to be allowed to the extent that it will have a right to
recover the claim compensation from the owner and the driver
after satisfying the same in relation to claimants Smt. Guddi
alias Rajabeti & Others.