Back
2012 Supreme(Bom) 544
In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
M.T. JOSHI, J.
United India Insurance Company Ltd.
Versus
Senapati alias Chandrasen s/o. Rambhau Navale & Others
First Appeal No.599 of 1996
Decided on : 12-03-2012
For the Appellant:S.V. Kulkarni, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R1, S.M. Godsay, R2, D.A. Mane h/f. K.B. Bhise, R3, R4 & R6, S.S. Thombre, Advocates.
Mere transfer of the insured vehicle during the period of insurance does not absolve the liability of the insurance company to provide compensation to the dependents of the victim
Headnote:
Insurance - Motor Vehicles Act - Breach of terms and conditions of the policy
Fact of the Case:
Challenge to the award under section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act by the insurer based on the transfer of the insured vehicle and absence of valid license with the driver
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the transfer of the vehicle during the period of insurance does not absolve the liability of the insurance company, and there was no evidence to support the contention of the insurer regarding the absence of a valid driving license with the driver
Issues: Breach of terms and conditions of the policy, validity of the driving license of the driver
Ratio Decidendi: Mere transfer of the vehicle during the period of insurance cannot be a ground to deny compensation by the insurer to the dependents of the victim
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the original claimants were allowed to withdraw the amount deposited in the Court
Heard both sides. Challenge to the award under section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act by original respondent No.2 i.e. insurer is mainly on the ground that on the date of the accident, the insured had already transferred the vehicle in question to another person during subsistence of the contract of insurance between him and the insurer without intimation to the appellant. Therefore, according to learned Counsel for the appellant, there is a breach of terms and conditions of the policy. Second limb of argument is that the driver of the truck in question was not holding valid licence and even he was convicted for the same.
2. Mr. S.S. Thombre, learned Counsel for the original claimants i.e. respondent Nos.3,4 & 6 submits that the liability of insurance company upon transfer of the vehicle is not absolved in view of clear ratio laid down in the case of G. Govindan Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Others, AIR 1999 SC 1398 and Rikhi Ram & Another Vs. Smt. Sukhrania & Others, AIR 2003 S.C. 1446(1). Further as regards the defence of absence of any valid licence with the driver of the truck involved in the accident, Mr. S.S. Thombre submits that the learned Tribunal has rightly come to the conclusion that no evidence in this regard was led by the appellant.
3. The issue of alleged breach of terms and conditions of the policy of insurance in view of transfer of insured vehicle within the period of insurance is no more res-integra, in view of the ratio laid down in the cases of G. Govindan and Rikhi Ram (cited supra). Mere transfer of the vehicle during the period of insurance cannot be a ground to deny compensation by the insurer to the dependents of the victim. In view of that matter, said defence cannot be sustained.
4. As regards, absence of valid driving licence with the driver of the truck in question, Mr. S.V. Kulkarni fairly conceded that no evidence was led to support the contention of the appellant/ insurance company that the driver was convicted in criminal case on this count. In this view of the matter, the appeal deserves to be dismissed and the same is dismissed without any order as to costs. The original claimants are allowed to withdraw the amount deposited in this Court.
