Insurance Co. held liable to pay compensation even though driver did'nt have DL.
Insurance Co. held liable to pay compensation even though driver did'nt have DL.
Deceased traveled in vehicle. A speeding truck hit deceased while he was travelling, he sustained injuries & died. Suit for compensation was filed. It was alleged, compensation claimed was excessive & driver was driving vehicle carefully & properly, so not liable. Court held, driver not having valid driving licence at relevant time, yet Insurance Co. laible to pay compensation, under statutory obligation & recover it later from others liable.-500326
Brief facts:
1. Deceased, Sh. Mool Chand was travelling in a vehicle.
2. An unknown truck came from the wrong side which was driven in a rash and negligent manner and the said truck struck against the Swaraj Mazda vehicle in which the deceased was also traveling due to which, the accident took place wherein the deceased sustained injuries and expired.
3. Thus, injured demanded compensation.
4. It was alleged that compensation amount as claimed is excessive and driver was driving the vehicle carefully and properly and so they are not liable to pay any compensation amount to LR's of deceased.
Court held as under:
5. The postmortem examination of the deceased was conducted which is not disputed and the attested copy of the postmortem examination report of the deceased is also placed on record which is not under challenge. It is also shown on record that the deceased had expired due to various injuries as sustained by him in the said accident and accordingly, in the given facts and circumstances, in considered opinion of the court, non examination of the doctor who had conducted MACT No.95/11 Pinkesh v. Kashi Nath 11 of 18 postmortem examination of the deceased is not fatal to the case of petitioners/LRs of deceased. Accordingly, in the given facts and circumstances and on the basis of material as placed on record, Issue No.1 is decided in favour of the petitioners/LRs of deceased and against the respondents.
6. In the case in hand, Reliance General Insurance Co./R3 has examined one witness namely Sh. R.Ashwin Kumar, (Sr. Executive, Reliance General Insurance co.) as R3W1. He has proved certain documents as Ex. R3W1/1 to R3W1/2 which are the copy of insurance policy of Swaraj Mazda Vehicle No. DL1LG9897 and verification report filed by the IO. As per document Ex. R3W1/2 which is verification report of the Investigating officer, it is shown that Sh. Kashi Nath/R1 was MACT No.95/11 Pinkesh v. Kashi Nath 15 of 18 not holding transport driving licence at the time of accident. Accordingly, it is amply clear that at the time of accident, R1 was not holding driving licence to drive a transport vehicle.
7. In the present case, though, it is shown on record that though Sh. Kashi Nath/R1 was not having valid driving licence at the relevant time, yet Reliance General Insurance company/R3 is under statutory obligation to pay the compensation amount to the petitioners/claimants/LRs of deceased and it can very well recover the said amount from R1 and R2 as per rules as per procedure established by law.
Case Reference-Sh. Pinkesh vs Sh. Kashi Nath
IN THE COURT OF MS. BARKHA GUPTA : JUDGE : PO, MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL :NORTH WEST DISTRICT, ROHINI COURTS: DELHI
×
