Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI, J
N.I.A. Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Sushila – Respondent
Order :
1. The present Civil Misc. Appeal has been filed by the appellant – Insurance Company against the order dated 13.02.2012 passed by learned MACT, Bikaner in Case No.151/2006 titled as Sushil Vs. Ganga Vishan, whereby, the learned MACT while partly allowing the claim of the claimants has awarded a sum of Rs.5,00,200/-. By way of filing present appeal, the appellant/Insurance Company is seeking quashing and setting aside of the order dated 13.02.2012.
2. Brief facts giving rise to instant appeal are that the claimants/respondents No.1 to 3 filed a claim petition on 28.02.2006 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, stating that on 04.01.2006, the husband of respondent No. 1, Smt. Sushila, and the father of minor claimants No. 2 and 3, namely Tarachand (aged 2 years) and Monika (aged 4 years), respectively, was traveling as a supervisor and cleaner in truck No. RJ-07-G- 7209 from Jodhpur to Bikaner. Around 3:00 PM, when the truck was on National Highway No. 65, between Bhagrod and Ahmadpura, respondent No. 4, Ganga Bishan, drove the truck negligently and carelessly, moving it to the wrong side of the road, where it collided with an oncoming truck No. RJ-07-G-3331. As a resul
The court affirmed the Tribunal's award of compensation, finding no merit in the Insurance Company's claims regarding the driver's identity and negligence.
The court established that an Insurance Company may still be liable for compensation despite the driver's lack of a valid license if negligence is proven against the other party.
Under MV Act Section 163A, negligence need not be proved in compensation claims, but tribunals must apply judicial mind to all issues like driver's license validity before fastening liability.
The insurance company must provide evidence to support its claims, and failure to do so may result in the dismissal of the appeal.
The court established that witness testimony can substantiate claims of negligence in motor vehicle accidents, affirming the liability of the driver and the insurance company.
Liability of the insurance company to pay compensation to the petitioners in the first instance and recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle.
The onus of proof regarding the validity of the driving license and authorization to drive the vehicle remains with the insurance company, and the violation of insurance policy terms cannot be presum....
Compensation under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act can be granted without strict proof of negligence, and the involvement of the vehicle in the accident must be established to determine compen....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
