JUDGEMENT :

1. Heard Mr. S. Roy, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. R. Deka, learned counsel for the claimants/respondents.

2. This appeal is filed by the appellant/insurance company challenging the judgment and award dated 20.09.2016 in MAC case No. 1486/2013 passed by the ld. Member, MACT No.2, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, awarding an amount of Rs.2,62,480/-in favour of the injured/claimant.

3. The brief facts of the case is that on 21.03.2013 at about 11 a.m. while the claimant/respondent was proceeding from his residence towards his office by riding his Scooter bearing Regd. No. AS-25-A-9076 and on the way to his office at Dispur, Lakhiminagar Tiniali, one Auto Van bearing Regd. No. AS-15C-4438 coming from the same direction in a rash and negligent manner knocked him down as a result of which, he sustained grievous injuries on his person. Immediacy, after the occurrence, he was taken to Dispur Hospital, where he was treated as an indoor patient.

4. After the accident, one case was registered vide Hatigaon P.S. case No. 99/2013 under Sections 279/337/338 IPC. At the relevant time of accident, the alleged offending vehicle was duly insured with National Insurance Company Ltd.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that in the instant case, the claim petition, Form 54, seizure list and MVI report show that the driving licence bearing No. 1858/NB/06/MISC was valid upto 24.10.2012, whereas the accident took place on 21.10.2013, which shows that at the time of accident, the offending vehicle was driven by a driver who had no valid driving licence and as such, there is a violation of policy condition but the ld. Tribunal did not consider the same and most illegally fastened the liability upon the insurance company to pay the awarded amount. In that view of the matter, the judgment and award is liable to be set aside.

6. It is also the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that the vouchers and bills submitted by the clamant are not genuine, some of them are not having the name of the patient and some of them are not having any seal and signature of the issuing person and some of the bills are not supported with any doctor’s prescription and many of the bills/cash memos were issued after a long gap of the alleged accident i.e. after 9 months to 12 months and even after more than one year which are not related to the injuries caused to the alleged accident. But the learned tribunal in spite of that anomalies in the vouchers and bills, considered those vouchers and bills and awarded compensation accordingly.

7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents/claimants argued that the respondent No. 1 has submitted cash memos/vouchers amounting to Rs.2,41,370/-and he is entitled to get the said amount which he spent for his treatment.

8. Admittedly there is no dispute regarding accident or the involvement of the alleged vehicle. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the driving licence of the driver was not valid on the date of the accident. The documents available in the record show that the driver of the alleged offending vehicle was not having effective and valid driving licence at the relevant time of the accident.

9. In this case, the name of the driver of the offending vehicle is Mizunur Rahman. The insurance company examined one witness Shri Ajoy Saha as DW1 who is the insurance investigator. He deposed in his evidence that he is the insurance investigator by profession and has been duly appointed as a investigator by the National Insurance Company Ltd. to investigate MAC Case No. 1486/2013 arising out of Hatigaon P.S. case No. 99/2013 in connection with a vehicular accident which took place on 21.03.2013 at Lakhiminagar Tiniali, Hatigaon causing injury to one Dinesh Talukdar @ Dinesh Ch. Talukdar by involving a scooter bearing Regd. No. AS-25A-9076 and a auto van bearing Regd. No. AS-15-C-4438, as per claim petition filed by the claimant. During