A driver’s unrenewed license does not breach insurance policy conditions if valid prior to an accident, impacting liability in compensation claims.

JUDGMENT :

ASHOK S. KINAGI, J.

1. MFA 101915 of 2016 is filed by the insurance company, and MFA 103200 of 2017 is filed by the claimant. These appeals arise out of the judgment and award dated 16.03.2016 passed in MVC No.627 of 2012 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Ballari. (for short the ‘Tribunal’)

2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of these appeals are as follows:

On 12.08.2011, the claimant being the driver of the lorry bearing registration number KA.37/A.145 at Jindal factory, Thorangallu, was proceeding with the load of cement to unload the same at Shivamogga, and when the claimant had stopped the lorry on the proper side of the road to fill the diesel at Bharat Petroleum Bunk, Kurekuppa, at about 8:30 PM, at that time, the driver of the lorry bearing registration No.KA.37/A-144 came in a reverse direction at a great speed in a rash and negligent manner, and dashed to the claimant. As a result, the petitioner sustained grievous injuries. The petitioner filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT seeking compensation for the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. It is contended that claimant spent a huge amount towards medical and the other expenses. It is contended that a criminal case was registered against the driver of the offending vehicle in Crime No. 85 of 2011 of Gadiganur Police Station. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petition.

3. The owner and the driver of the offending vehicle filed their written statement denying the averments made in the claim petition. It is contended that the driver of the lorry possessed a valid and effective driving licence as of the date of the accident. It is contended that the vehicle was insured with the insurance company, and the insurance company is liable to pay the compensation amount claimed by the claimant. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the driver and the owner of the offending vehicle.

4. The insurance company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition. It is also contended that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving licence as of the date of the accident. Hence, there is violation of the policy conditions. It is contended that the owner of the offending vehicle entrusted the vehicle to the person who did not possess a valid and effective driving licence as of the date of the accident. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the insurance company.

5. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues.

6. The claimant, to substantiate his case, examined himself as PW.1, examined the Doctor as PW.2 and marked 23 documents as Exhibits P.1 to P.23. In rebuttal, the Manager (legal) of the Insurance Company was examined as RW1, one witness was examined as RW2, and marked 3 documents as Exhibits R1 to R3.

7. The Tribunal after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part vide judgement dated 16.03.2016 and awarded a compensation of Rs.4,43,840/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realisation. It is also held that the respondents i.e., the owner, the driver and the insurance company of the offending vehicle are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount and the insurance company was directed to deposit the compensation amount.

8. The insurance company, aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tri