The cancellation of an insurance cover note by an insurance company due to non-payment of premium by the owner does not affect the rights of a third-party claimant who has suffered injuries or damages in a motor vehicle accident.

( 1 ) -THIS appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 17th September, 1994 passed by Sri A. K. Bhattacharya, Judge, Motor Accident Claim Tribunal at Alipore in M. A. C. Case No. 315 of 1993 whereby and whereunder the said Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 25,000/- towards compensation under section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

( 2 ) THE 1st respondent herein for self and on behalf of her parents-in-law and three minors children filed an application for grant of compensation arising out of a motor vehicle accident caused by a vehicles bearing registration No. WB-12-E-O379 which is said to have been insured with the appellant.

( 3 ) THE owner of the said vehicle has not preferred any appeal and thus we are not concerned in this appeal with the quantum of the award made by the learned Tribunal. The fact that an accident had taken place is not denied or disputed. The fact that the claimants-respondents are entitled to file the application is also not denied and disputed.

( 4 ) THE question which is raised by the appellant herein, is that the claim petition was filed in violation of the rules framed by the State of West Bengal under the Motor Vehicles Accident Rules. It is further contended that as no premium was paid by the owner, the same would be hit by section 64-VB of the Insurance Act, 1938.

( 5 ) MR. Banik, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the claimant-respondents, however, submitted that a third party is not concerned with the question as to whether the appellant had been paid the premium or not. According to the learned counsel, an insurance cover note had been issued which is said to have been cancelled at a later date and, thus on the date on which the insurance cover note was issued, it would be deemed that there existed a valid contract of insurance.

( 6 ) THE provisions of the West Bengal Motor Vehicles Rules are not mandatory in nature. If substantial compliance is made with regard to the requirement of the said provision, the same would serve the purpose. For the purpose of consideration of the objection raised by the appellant herein we may note that clause 17 of the claim petition, it is stated :-

( 7 ) THE appellant in its written statement, inter alia, stated :-"with reference to the statements made in the answering portion of column Nos. 15 to 17 of the claim application this opposite party has not issued any Insurance Policy in respect of the vehicle bearing No. WBY-4211 at the material time of the alleged accident and as such the relationship of Insurer and Insured has not been established between the owner of the said vehicle and the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. , and accordingly this opposite party is not liable to indemnify the liabilities of the owner of the said vehicle in regard to third party risk as alleged in the claim application. This opposite party further states that the cover note issued by this opposite party on 25. 6. 93 against the vehicle being No. WBY-4211 has been cancelled by this opposite party due to non-payment of premium by the owner of the vehicle being No. WBY 4211 and accordingly, the question of issuance of Insurance Policy in respect of the said vehicle does not arise at all since the cover note issued previously by the Insurance Company has already been cancelled. This opposite Party No. 2 namely the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. , cancelled the cover note issued by the Insurance Company on the ground that the provision as envisaged under section 64 VB of the Indian Insurance Act has not been complied by the owner of the said vehicle being No. WBY 4211 and accordingly the Insurance Company has not issued the Insurance Policy in respect of the said vehicle and as such there is no insurable interest as per Indian Insurance Act. "

( 8 ) THE appellant examined one Pradip Kumar Chakraborty as a witness. The said witness produced the carbon copy of the insurance cover bearing the signature of the Development Officer. He also proved a factimili of