The insurer is primarily liable to pay compensation to accident victims, with the right to recover from the vehicle owner, reinforcing the social welfare purpose of the Motor Vehicles Act.

JUDGMENT

1. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award dtd. 13/6/2011 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Beawar, District Ajmer in Claim Case No.09/2009(280/2007). The claimant-appellants (hereinafter referred as the claimants) have submitted that this appeal for enhancement of compensation amount and have also challenged the finding recorded by the Tribunal while deciding the issue No.2 and exonerating the Insurance Company from its liability to make payment of compensation.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal is on the lower side and requires suitable enhancement. He further submitted that while deciding issue No.3, the Tribunal has recorded a contradictory finding by saying that the driver of the vehicle was having a valid licence Ex.9 but the Tribunal has seriously erred in holding that since no evidence was produced by the driver owner of the vehicle that the driver of the vehicle was driving the vehicle on the instructions of the person having valid licence. Counsel further submitted that quashing the aforesaid finding recorded while deciding issue No.3 a direction be issued to the Insurance Company to pay compensation to the claimants and thereafter recover the same from the driver owner of the vehicle in this regard.

3. Learned counsel has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shamanna and Ors.Versus The Divisional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and Ors. reported in (2018) 9 SCC 650 which reads as under:.

"Learned counsel has further submitted that the direction be issued to the Insurance Company to pay the amount of compensation to the appellants and thereafter, recover the same from owner of the vehicle.

In this regard, learned counsel has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shamanna and Ors. Versus The Divisional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors (2018) 9 SCC 650,wherein, it was held as under:-

"In the present case, to deny the benefit of 'pay and recover', what seems to have substantially weighed with the High Court is the reference to larger Bench made by the two-Judge Bench in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Parvathneni and another (2009) 8 SCC 785 which doubted the correctness of the decisions which in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India directing insurance company to pay the compensation amount even though insurance company has no liability to pay. In Parvathneni case, the Supreme Court pointed out that Article 142 of the Constitution of India does not cover such type of cases and that "if the insurance company has no liability to pay at all, then, it cannot be compelled by order of the court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to pay the compensation amount and later on recover it from the owner of the vehicle". The above reference in Parvathneni case has been disposed of on 17/9/2013 by the three- Judges Bench keeping the questions of law open to be decided in an appropriate case.

Since the reference to the larger bench in Parvathneni case has been disposed of by keeping the questions of law open to be decided in an appropriate case, presently the decision in Swaran Singh case followed in Laxmi Narain Dhut and other cases hold the field. The award passed by the Tribunal directing the insurance company to pay the compensation amount awarded to the claimants and thereafter, recover the same from the owner of the vehicle in question, is in accordance with the judgment passed by this Court in Swaran Singh and Laxmi Narain Dhut cases. While so, in our view, the High Court ought not to have interfered with the award passed by the Tribunal directing the first respondent to pay and recover from the owner of the vehicle. The impugned judgment of the High Court exonerating the insurance company from its lia