The insurance company is liable to pay compensation even if the driver did not have a valid driving license at the time of the accident, provided that the driver had a valid license at any time.

H.S.Bedi, J.

1. This appeal arises out of the following facts:-

On 4.9.1981 at about 7.15 p.m., Bhajan Lal deceased and one Piare Lai were coming to village Mangali from Hissar on Motor Cycle No. HYB-2088, Bhajan Lal was driving the motor cycle whereas Piare Lai was sitting on the rear seat. When they reached near the area of village Gangua, a tractor bearing registration No. HRB-9950 driven by Bhagwan Dass respondent No. 1 in the claim petition came from the opposite side at a very high speed. On seeing the tractor coming towards him, Bhajan Lal took the motor cycle towards the kacha portion but the tractor driver could not control his vehicle and struck against the motor cycle and as a result of the accident both Bhajan Lal and Piare Lal received injuries and were removed to the hospital where Bhajan Lal died shortly thereafter. On these facts, the claimants i.e. the mother and the minor child of Bhajan Lal filed a claim petition before the Tribunal.

2. On notices, the respondents put in appearance and claimed that the tractor had not been involved in the accident, whereas respondent No.3 the Insurance Co. took the plea that the accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the motor cycle by Bhajan Lal deceased, more particularly as he had no valid driving licence. The Insurance Company also pleaded that as the tractor driver was not holding a valid driving licence, it was not liable on that additional ground as well.

3. On the questions posed, the following issues were framed.

1. Whether the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of Bhagwan Dass-respondent No. 1? OPP

2. To what amount of compensation, the petitioners are entitled to get and from whom? OPP

3. Whether the petition is time barred ? OPR

4. Whether the petition is liable to be dismissed as alleged in preliminary objection Nos. 1 and 3 of the written statement? OPR

5. Whether the petition is bad for non-joinder of parties? OPR

6.Relief.

4. The Tribunal found that the accident had taken place on account of rash and negligent driving of the tractor driver, Bhagwan Dass. On issue No. 2, the Tribunal held that on a consideration of the evidence, it was evident that the monthly income of Bhajan Lal deceased was about Rs. 600/- and that after spending a sum of Rs. 200/- per month on himself, the annual dependency worked out to be Rs. 4800/- and applying a multiplier of 16 as the deceased was about 26 years of age determined the compensation at Rs. 76,800/-. The Tribunal further held that Bhagwan Dass the tractor driver did not have a driving licence and as such though the tractor stood insured, the Insurance Company was not liable to make good the compensation and accordingly held the owner and the driver of the tractor i.e. the two appellants responsible jointly and severally for the payment of the compensation. Hence this appeal at their instance.

5. Mr. L.M. Suri, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants has urged that he did not seriously challenge the quantum of compensation that had been determined by the Tribunal but the finding of the Tribunal that Bhagwan Dass did not hold a valid driving licence was incorrect. He has further pointed out that while this appeal remained pending here, CM No. 7591 CII and 7592-CII of 1993 was moved for additional evidence and this CM was allowed after notice to the parties and Ramesh Chand the owner of the truck and Bhagwan Dass its driver were duly examined and the driving licence Ex.C-1 in the name of Bhagwan Dass was proved in this case and as such the Insurance Company could no longer escape its liability to pay the compensation.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. As already mentioned above, the compensation that has been found due has not been seriously challenged by Mr. Suri. The only ground by which the Insurance Company was able to escape its liability was that Bhagwan Dass did not hold a driving licence. As mentioned a