IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Kuldeep Mathur, J.
Nanak Chand S/o Shri Lal Chand - Appellant
Versus
Indra Devi W/o Shri Ramchandra and ors. – Respondents
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1469/2022, S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1301/2022
Decided On : 08-07-2024
MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT - LIABILITY OF INSURER - M.V. Act, Section 173; Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, Section 3 - The court discussed the liability of the insurer in the context of a driver holding a learner's license. It emphasized that a learner's license is valid under the M.V. Act, and the burden of proof lies on the insurer to demonstrate any breach of conditions. The court found that the insurer failed to provide evidence of such a breach, leading to the conclusion that the insurer remains liable for compensation.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants filed civil misc. appeals against a judgment from the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, which held them jointly liable for compensation after an accident involving a vehicle driven by a person with a learner's license. The Tribunal absolved the insurer from liability, citing a breach of the learner's license conditions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the driver possessed a valid learner's license and that the insurer did not provide sufficient evidence to prove any breach of the license conditions. The court concluded that the insurer was liable to pay compensation to the claimants.
Issues: Whether the insurer can be absolved from liability based on the driver's learner's license status and alleged breaches of the license conditions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that a learner's license is valid under the M.V. Act, and the burden of proof for any alleged breach lies with the insurer. The insurer's failure to provide evidence of a breach meant it could not be absolved from liability.
Final Decision: The appeals were allowed, the Tribunal's judgment was modified to hold the insurer liable for compensation, and the insurer was ordered to deposit the awarded amount with the Tribunal within two months.
ORDER :
Kuldeep Mathur, J.
1. The present civil misc. appeals under Section 173 of the M.V. Act have been filed by the appellants against the judgment and award dated 29.06.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Labour Court), Sri Ganganagar in Motor Accident Claim Case No.58/2017, whereby the learned Tribunal while holding the appellants jointly and severally liable to pay, passed an award for, an amount of Rs.8,91,664/- with an interest @ 7% p.a. with effect from 04.06.2015 till the date of realization of amount, in favour of the claimants.
2. The present appeals have been preferred against the findings recorded in issue Nos.2, 3 and 4 as arrived at, by the learned Tribunal wherein it was held that the driver of the offending vehicle, at the time of accident was holding only a learner’s licence. It was further held that the driver of the vehicle had breached the conditions of learner’s licence issued in his favour and, therefore, the insurer i.e. respondent No.6 cannot be held liable to satisfy the liability of paying compensation to the claimants.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants are the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle respectively. It was contended that the impugned judgment and award dated 29.06.2022 has been passed without considering the facts and law applicable in the present case in their true perspective. To substantiate the above contention, it was submitted that admittedly, the driver of the offending vehicle at the time of alleged incident was holding a learner’s licence and therefore it cannot be said that the insurer i.e. respondent No.6 is not liable to satisfy the liability. The insurer ought not to have been absolved from its liability merely for some technical breach of conditions of driving licence, if any.
4. Learned counsel urged that as a matter of fact, no evidence was led by the insurance company i.e. respondent No.6 before the learned Tribunal to prove the alleged breach of the terms and conditions of learner’s driving licence as enumerated under Section 3 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 by the driver of the offending vehicle at the time of the accident.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants thus prayed that the impugned judgment and award dated 29.06.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sri Ganganagar in Motor Accident Claim No.58/2017 may be quashed and set aside or in the alternative, the finding recorded by the learned Tribunal on issue No.2, so far as to absolve the insurer i.e. respondent No.6 from its liability to pay compensation to the claimants, may be interfered with.
6. Per Contra, learned counsel Shri Mukul Singhvi appearing on behalf of the insurer submitted that from a perusal of the impugned judgment and award dated 29.06.2022, it is evident that at the time of the alleged incident the offending vehicle was being driven in violation of policy conditions of insurance policy and also in contravention to the mandatory conditions enumerated under Section 3 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rule, 1989. The insurer has rightly been discharged from the liability to pay the compensation to the claimants by the learned Tribunal in the impugned judgment and award dated 29.06.2022.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length. Perused the material available on record.
8. Section 3 of Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 is reproduced herein below for ready reference:
(a) such person is the holder of an effective learners license issued to him in Form 3 to drive the vehicle;
(b) such person is accompanied by an instructor holding an effective driving license to drive the vehicle and such instructor is sitting in such a position to control or stop the vehicle; and
(c) there is painted, in the front and the rear of the
A learner's licence is valid but must comply with specific conditions, including being accompanied by a qualified instructor while driving a motorcycle.
The insurer must prove a breach of policy conditions by the insured to avoid liability; mere invalidity of a driving license does not absolve the insurer from responsibility.
The insurance company is exonerated from liability for compensation as the driver lacked a valid driving license, establishing a breach of policy conditions.
The absence of a qualified instructor for a learner driver does not constitute a breach of insurance policy, maintaining the insurer's liability for compensation in the event of an accident.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.