The liability of the insurance company to pay compensation is not solely dependent on the validity of the driver's license, and the insurance company may still be liable even if the driver's license is found to be fake.

Syed Md.Mahfooz Alam, J.

1. This Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 27.4.2001 and the Award dated 1.5.2001 passed by Sri Baikunth Nath Shahi, 3rd Additional District. Judge-cum- Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, in M.V. Claim No. 36/99/100/2000 whereby he has been pleased to award compensation to the claimant-respondent to the tune of rupees fifty thousand with interest @ 12% per annum and directed the appellant-Insurance Company to pay the entire compensation amount.

2. From perusal of the lower courts record, it appears that this claim case was filed for grant of compensation for the death of a minor girl aged about ten years who died in a road accident on 17.12.1998 at about 9.00 A.M. near Koriya Chauk, Begusarai, while she was waiting for her school bus. The vehicle which was involved in the accident had registration No. BR-1P 8645. Further allegation was that the driver of the said vehicle was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently, as a result of which, the accident occurred in which the girl Guriya died. It is said that the vehicle was insured under the appellant-Insurance Company.

3. It appears that the claim was contested by the Insurance Company on the ground that the driver of the bus had no valid licence. From the perusal of the judgment of the Tribunal, it transpires that the Tribunal while discussing the evidence adduced by the Insurance Company arrived at the conclusion that there was no substance in the plea of the Opposite Party-Insurance Company that the driving licence of the driver was fake or spurious and, as such, the Tribunal rejected the plea of the appellant-Insurance Company and directed the Company to pay the entire compensation.

4. It has been argued by the learned Advocate of the appellant that the said finding of the tribunal is erroneous in view of the fact that the Insurance Company had brought on record the report of the D.T.O., Gwalior, which showed that the driving licence produced in connection with this case was fake one. He submitted that the said report has been marked as Exhibit-B. He submitted that since Exhibit-B establishes beyond doubt that the driver, who was driving the vehicle which caused accident, had fake licence and, therefore, the learned Tribunal should have held that the owner of the bus had violated the terms and conditions of the policy and so, the Insurance Company was not liable to pay compensation. To support his argument, the learned Advocate of the appellant has placed reliance upon the decision reported in (1997)7 SCC page 558 (United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V/s.Gian Chand and Others).

5. I have gone through para 8 of the judgment of the Tribunal in which the Tribunal has discussed the issue of validity of licence of the driver, from the perusal of which it appears that after discussing the evidence of O.P.W. No.1 Brahamdeo Narayan Prasad and O.P.W. No. 2 Kaushal Kishore Singh, who were formal witnesses, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that Exhibit-B was not properly proved and in absence of examination of author of Exhibit-B it cannot be held that the driving licence of the driver was fake or spurious.

6. I am of the opinion that the view taken by the learned Tribunal is very much correct as neither the author of Exhibit-B was examined nor any register of the office of the D.T.O., Gwalior, was brought on record to establish that on the relevant date no licence was issued to driver of the concerned vehicle. I am further of the view that in absence of proof that the driver had no valid licence it cannot be held that the owner of the bus has violated the terms and conditions of the policy and, as such, the decision relied upon by the learned Advocate of the appellant is not applicable in this case.

7. On the other hand, learned Advocate of the respondents has placed reliance upon the decision reported in II (2003) SLT page 516 [: 2003(2) PLJR (SC) 169] (United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V/s.Lehru & Ors.) in support of his a