Tribunal erred in applying pay and recovery principle, holding insurance company jointly and severely liable for compensation without applying pay and recover.

ORDER :

1. These are eight appeals by the owner arising out of the eight different claim cases decided by the Third Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur arising out of the same accident that took place on 01.01.2010 involving the same vehicle. Since the ground of challenge in all these eight appeals are identical in nature, these eight appeals are being proceeded to be decided by a common order.

2. Facts leading to the filing of the appeals is the accident on 01.01.2010 which took place at Village Siltara District Raipur between two vehicles Tata Magic bearing registration No.CG04 T 4494 and Tata Matador bearing registration No.CG 04 ZB 2163. The Tata Magic was insured with the Shriram General Insurance Company Limited and Tata Matador was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company limited. Four persons had died in the said accident and many persons received injuries from the said accident.

3. There were eight different motor vehicle claim cases that were filed before the Third Additional Motor Accident Tribunal. All these cases were decided by separate orders by the Tribunal. The number of eight motor vehicle claim cases as also the date of decision of the Tribunal and amount of compensation awarded is reproduced in a Tabular Form as under :-

4. As per the records, on 01.01.2010 when in the Tata Magic passengers were coming from Korba where the passengers had gone for a religious function and while returning to Mandir Hasaud, Tata Magic in which they were travelling registered as CG 04 T 4494 was hit by the Tata Matador coming from the opposite direction at Village Siltara. The Matador was registered as bearing registration No.CG 04 ZB 2163. The Tribunal finally vide impugned award under challenge have passed an amount of compensation as reflected in the table cited above in respect of the 8 different claim cases. While passing the said impugned orders the Tribunal had applied the principle of pay and recovery against the owner fastening the liability of payment of compensation upon the Insurance Company i.e. the Oriental Insurance Company which had insured the Matador which had hit the Tata Magic with liberty to recover the awarded amount from the owner. The rule of pay and recover was applied on the ground that the license which was used by the driver of the Tata Matador at the time of accident was not proper a valid license and it was rather a fake document. It is this order of pay and recovery awarded by the Tribunal which has been subjected to challenge in these 8 appeals.

5. Contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the finding so far as applying the pay and recovery per-se bad in law for the reason that there was no fault or error on the part of the owner appellant in following the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act in the course of operating the Tata Matador CG 04 ZB 2163 and that the driver had a valid license at the time of accident. The Vehicle had all the requisite certificates that are otherwise required under the Motor Vehicles Act and therefore liability could not had been fastened upon the owner for having committed any breach and in the course applying the principle of pay and recovery in favour of the Insurance Company.

6. Contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the vehicle at the relevant point of time was being driven by one Jamir Beg, son of Rahim Beg. Undisputedly, he had a license that was initially issued on 11.02.1985 by the RTO, Rai