SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(J&K) 449

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
Vinod Chatterji Koul, J.
National Insurance Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Mst. Fatima and Ors. – Respondent
CMAM No.36/2017
Decided on 23-04-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant(s):Mr. N.A. Dendroo, Advocate
For the Respondent(s):Mr. M. Altaf Khan, Advocate

Headnote:

Motor vehicles Act, 1988-Section 166-Death in vehicular accident-A licence to drive passenger vehicle would ordinarily be issued to a person having licence to drive light motor vehicle and after having experience to drive the same, would be entitled to get licence to drive light motor passenger vehicle-Driver of offending vehicle was having valid license of MPMV and taxi car-He was professional driver who could carry passengers while driving taxi car, as such, was having valid driving license even to drive light motor vehicle (private car)-Award passed by Tribunal modified to Rs. 15,44,200/-. (Paras 10, 11 and 12)

Result-Appeal Partly allowed.

Judgment :

Vinod Chatterji Koul, J.

1. Impugned in this appeal is the award dated 17.10.2016 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Srinagar (for short “Tribunal”) in a claim petition bearing file no.63/2012 titled “Mst. Fatima and others Versus Mrs. Neelam Manzoor and others”, directing appellant-National Insurance Company Ltd. to pay compensation in the amount of Rs.16,99,200/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till final realization.

2. The claim petition was filed by the respondent nos.1 to 5 before the Tribunal on 06.03.2012 claiming compensation on account of death of Fayaz Ahmad Bafanda S/o Mohammad Yousuf Bafanda R/o Butshah Mohala, Lal Bazar, Srinagar, in a motor accident which took place on 29.11.2011 at Kirhama Ganderbal due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle Maruti Swift bearing registration No. JK01M 0088 which was being driven by respondent no.2 namely Sheikh Shabir Ahmad. The offending vehicle was insured with respondent no.3 i.e. National Insurance Company Ltd. Respondent nos.1 to 5 claimed that deceased was of the age of 40 years who was business man by profession earning Rs.20,000/- per month claimed compensation of Rs.1.08 crores.

3. Respondent no.1 (owner) did not contest the claim petition. It was the respondent no.2 (driver) and the appellant-respondent no.3 who contested the claim petition before the Tribunal.

4. Respondent no.2 resisted the claim on the ground that actually the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the deceased who was driving a motor cycle bearing registration no.JK01P 8204 and not because of his act whereas respondent no.3-National Insurance Company Ltd. resisted the claim on the ground that the offending vehicle driver was in breach of conditions of the Insurance Policy and that the respondent no.2- driver was not holding a valid driving license. The Tribunal framed following issues which are as under:-

Issue No. 1

Whether on 29.11.2011 the deceased namely Fayaz Ahmad Bafanda while riding on his Pulsar motor cycle - bearing No. JKOIP 8204 coming from Kirhama towards Sumbal and on reaching near Zargud stop Kirhama another vehicle (Swift Maruti Car) bearing registration No. JKOIM 0088 driven by respondent No. 2 towards same direction hit the Motor bicycle of the deceased with the result the decease namely Fayaz Ahmad Bafanda fell down from the motor cycle and sustained fatal injuries to his head and other parts of his body and later on succumbed to his injuries in the hospital on 02.12.2011.OPP

Issue No. 2

Whether the respondent No. I owner has permitted the driver of the offending vehicle to ply the said vehicle without valid, effective DL and other vehicular documents, if yes, the insured has committed breach of insurance contract absolved the respondent No. 3 Insurance company from its liability on account of petitioners claim.OPR3

Issue No. 3

In case issue No.1 is proved in affirmative, to what amount of compensation the petitioners are entitled to, from whom and in what proportion. ? OPP

5. Respondents/claimants in support of their claim have produced witnesses namely Yasmeena Jan (petitioner No. 2 in claim petition) Munir Ahmad Trumboo, Hilal Ahmad Bhat, Nazir Ahmad Mir, whereas appellant-National Insurance Company produced Bashir Ahmad Sheikh, Motor vehicle Inspector ARTO Pulwama, and Owais Nazir, Legal Assistant of the appellant company in support of their defence. The Tribunal after having considered the evidence produced by both the parties awarded the compensation of Rs.16,99,200/- in favour of claimants along-with interest and directed the respondent no.3-National Insurance Company Ltd. to satisfy the award by depositing the same within a period of one month along-with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of the petition till final realization. The compensation was awarded by the Tribunal in the following

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      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

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top