The insurance company's liability may stand extinguished if the driver of the offending vehicle does not hold a valid endorsement to drive a passenger vehicle.

R. Sudhakar, J.

1. Instant appeal is filed by the appellant-insurance company, challenging the liability as well as quantum of compensation. The accident in this case happened on 01.02.2011. The deceased Mohammad Shafi Malik, said to be 40 years old was walking near General Bus-stand at K.C. Chowk, Jammu, when the offending vehicle bearing Registration No. 7740 JK02 AF, driven by Suman Kumar, owned by Narish Singh Salathia S/o. Bishambar Singh Salathia R/o 43, Hari Nagar Talab Tillo, Jammu, insured with the appellant, hit the deceased and in that accident he sustained multiple injuries and died on spot. FIR No. 04/2011 in Police Station Bus Stand Jammu was registered against the driver.

2. On his death, widow, two minor sons and mother has filed the claim petition before the Tribunal. On the oral evidence it has come to lime light that the deceased was doing fruit business and was earning Rs. 10,000/- per month. On the day of unfortunate accident one of minor son of deceased was accompanying to the deceased and therefore, he is the eye witness of the occurrence.

3. Based on the evidence, the learned Tribunal held that the driver of the offending vehicle was rash and negligent and caused the death of deceased and accordingly fixed the negligence on the driver and the liability on the owner of the vehicle. The insurance company in view of the contract of insurance was liable to satisfy the claim.

4. The insurance company took the plea that the driver of the offending vehicle had a driving license but was not valid to drive the passenger vehicle. This plea was supported by evidence of the ARTO. Therefore, the appellant-Insurance company is under no obligation to compensate the claimants and discharge the owner who has to be saddled with the liability as he allowed to the vehicle to be driven by a person not holding the driving license with endorsement to drive a passenger vehicle. Since there is a breach of condition, the appellant-Insurance Company's' plea is that its liability would stand extinguished on account of the fact that the driver of the offending vehicle did not hold a valid endorsement to drive passenger vehicle. This plea stands unrebutted by the owner of the vehicle. There is evidence on record. Hence appellants' plea is accepted.

5. In view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2006) 4 SCC 250, National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Musum Rai & Ors., the appellant-Insurance Company will however first discharge the award and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle.

6. The next question that arises for consideration is on the quantum of compensation. On the death of Mohammad Shafi, person engaged in fruit business and based on the oral evidence of witnesses Gh. Mohammad Malik Shahnawaz Ahmad, Ahmadullah, Abdul Salam Khan, Ab. Hamid Wani who were examined. Who testified that the deceased was an able bodied person and was doing good business. He was 40 years of age at the time of his death. Accordingly on the basis of the evidence, the Tribunal fixed the income of the deceased at Rs. 6000/- per month, applying the multiplier of 15. The learned Tribunal granted the award under various heads as follows:-

Sr.No.	Heading	Award of the Tribunal
1.	For Loss of Dependency.	Rs.8,10,000/-
2.	For Funeral Expenses	Rs.10,000/-
3.	For Transportation	Rs.10,000/-
4.	For Loss of Love and Affection	Rs.20,000/-

7. The plea of appellant insurance company that compensation is excessive is unacceptable. Tribunal has fixed the income reasonably, based on evidence of co-workers, the age of the deceased, his occupation and earning capacity. The multiplier and deduction is appropriate for the age of the deceased. The future prospects have not been considered. No amount is granted for loss of consortium. The Tribunal should have granted compensation for loss of consortium. Therefor