Insurer is liable for compensation due to negligent driving by the JCB driver, despite challenges on the validity of the driver's license.

JUDGMENT :

(RAVI V. HOSMANI, J.)

Challenging common judgment and award dated 26.10.2021 passed by Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Chittapur (‘tribunal’ for short) in MVC nos.324/2019 and 325/2019, these appeals are filed by insurer as well as claimants.

2. MFA no.201226/2022 is filed by insurer challenging award in MVC no.324/2019, while claimant has filed MFA no.200442/2022. Likewise, Insurer has filed MFA no.201227/2022 and claimant has filed MFA no.200539/2022 insofar as MVC no.325/2019 is concerned. Common grounds urged by insurer are that tribunal erred in fastening liability on insurer, even though driver of JCB did not possess effective and valid driving licence at time of accident.

3. In claim petition, it was submitted that on 25.12.2018, Shamaraya was riding motorcycle bearing Reg.no. KA-32/EE-1806 towards Chittapur with Vaijanath as pillion rider. At about 11:30 a.m., near Meghana bar, driver of JCB bearing Reg.no. KA-32/C-7472, drove it in rash and negligent manner, its bucket hit claimants and caused accident. Though, they took treatment at Kamareddy hospital etc., they did not recover fully and suffered permanent physical disability and loss of earning capacity. Therefore, claim petition was filed seeking compensation against owner and insurer of JCB.

4. Despite service of notice, owner of JCB did not appear and was placed ex-parte. Insurer opposed claim petition denying age, occupation, income and loss of earning capacity of claimants and alleging that driver of JCB was not holding valid and effective driving license and JCB was not insured with it etc.

5. Based on pleadings, tribunal framed issues, and recorded evidence. Claimants examined themselves as PW-1 and Dr.Ravi E. Shivaraya as PW-2. Exhibits.P-1 to P-14 were marked in both cases. Insurer examined two witnesses, ie., its official and RTO as RWs-1 and 2 and got marked letter addressed to RW-1 and extract of driving license as Ex.R-1 respectively.

6. On consideration, tribunal held that accident occurred due to negligent driving of JCB by its driver and that claimant sustained permanent disability, resulting in loss of future earning capacity. Therefore, tribunal awarded compensation accordingly :

[*Deleted Vide chamber order dated 03/07/2025]

7. Sri Manjunath Mallayya Shetty, learned counsel for insurer submitted, in MVC no. 324/2019 claimant - Vaijanath was aged 32 years at time of accident and was working at a petrol pump. Claimant sustained fracture of femur bone and PW.2 - Dr.Ravi E. Shivaraya, assessed permanent physical disability at 33%. However, tribunal erroneously considered functional disability at 25%, which was on higher side. It was further submitted, tribunal awarded Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering, though claimant had only sustained one fracture and underwent inpatient treatment for only 11 days. Award towards medical expenses, diet and incidental charges, were also on higher side.

8. On other hand, Sri Sanjeev Patil, learned counsel for claimant opposed insurance appeal and submitted there was no scope for reduction and sough