JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal is by the Owner under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award 15.05.2014 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (F.T.C.) Dhamtari, District Dhamtari, C.G. in Claim Case No. 12/2013, awarding total compensation of Rs.4,33,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till realization, fastening liability on the owner and driver while exonerating Insurance Company from liability on the ground that at the time of accident driver of vehicle was not having valid and effective licence to drive the vehicle. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall hereinafter be referred to as per their description before the Tribunal.

2. As per averments made in the claim petition, on 28.07.2012, deceased Dushen @ Dushyant Sahu, aged about 32 years, earning Rs.14,500/- per month as Salesman, working in Ms/ Ganga Maiya Tractors & Gulsan Agro Industries, was going with one Chabbi Lal on motorcycle bearing registration no. CG05-L-1273 as a pillion rider from Ambedkar Chowk, Dhamtari towards Tikrapara Chowk. However, on the way non-applicant no.1 by driving the vehicle truck bearing no.CG04-ZC-0890 (hereinafter referred to as ‘offending vehicle’) in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the said motorcycle, as a result of which, Dushen @ Dushyant Sahu & Chabbi Lal both suffered grievous injuries. During treatment, deceased- Dushen @ Dushyant Sahu succumbed to the injuries sustained by him in the accident. At the time of of accident, the offending vehicle was owned by non-applicant no.2 and insured with non-applicant no.3.

3. On claim petition being filed by the claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for compensation to the tune of Rs.46,50,000/-, the Tribunal considering the evidence led by both the parties passed an award as mentioned above in para 1 of this judgment.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant/owner submits that though he has raised various grounds in the memo of appeal, however, he is not pressing all those grounds and is assailing the award on the sole ground that the Tribunal has wrongly exonerated the Insurance Company/non-applicant No.3 of its liability on the ground that at the time of accident, non-applicant No.1/driver was not having a valid and effective driving licence to drive the vehicle whereas according to the final report Ex.P-1 and seizure memo Ex.A-9 (driving licence of deceased), it stands proved that non-applicant No.1 was having a valid and effective driving licence on the date of accident. The Insurance Company has not adduced any evidence to substantiate the defence that the vehicle in question was being driven by non-applicant No.1 in violation of the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy. He also submits that the offending vehicle was duly insured with non-applicant No.3 on the date of accident. In these circumstances, the Tribunal ought to have fastened the liability on non-applicant No.3/Insurance Company.

5. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company opposes the contention made by the appellant's counsel and submits that the Tribunal, considering the overall evidence oral and documentary available on record, has rightly exonerated the Insurance Company/non-applicant No.3 of its liability, which needs no interference by this Court.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Swaran Singh, reported in (2004) 3 SCC 297 laid down parameters/guidelines while deciding the claim application by the Tribunal in clause (iii), (iv) & (vi) of paragraph 110, has held as under:-

iii) The breach of policy condition e.g. disqualification of the driver or invalid driving licence of the driver, as contained in sub-section (2)(a)(ii) of Section 149, has to be proved to have been committed by the insured for avoiding liability by the insurer. Mere absence, fake or invalid driving licence or disqualification of th