The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the effective date and time of the insurance policy and the existence of a binding contract of insurance at the time of the accident.

ARUN MONGA, J.

Aggrieved by Award dated 20.09.2019 rendered by learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh (for brevity, Tribunal), appellant-Insurance Company is before this Court by way of an appeal.

2. Succinct facts, as noted by learned Tribunal, are as below:

“……on 12.09.2017 at about 8.37 PM, deceased Harmesh Lal was going on his bicycle from his official residence Sector 39, Chandigarh to Sector 16 i.e. the place of his job. When he reached near Bus Stop Sectors 37/38 dividing road on Sector 38 side, offending vehicle bearing registration No.CH-01-AC-8860 driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner came there and hit the cycle of deceased from backside. Due to the accident, he sustained multiple and grievous injuries. Surinder Kumar s/o Ram Kishore was also coming after doing his duty who witnessed the accident. He took the injured to PGI, Chandigarh with the help of passersby but Harmesh Lal died in PGI on 14.09.2017. Due to the accident, case FIR No. 391 dated 13.09.2017 u/s 279, 337 IPC & 185, 181 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 came to be registered on the statement of Surinder Kumar s/o Ram Kishore. It is claimed that deceased on the date of accident and death was 49 years of age. He was an employee of Punjab Armed Police and posted as Constable at DGP-IVC, Sector 16, Chandigarh and drawing 1 lac per month as salary. Hence, a claim for compensation to the tune of?1 crore along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of accident till actual realization has been put up.”

2.1. Upon notice, respondents No.6&7 (driver and owner of the alleged offending car) filed their written statement denying factum of accident and also refuting other allegations leveled in the claim petition.

2.2 Appellant-Insurance Company filed separate written statement stating that driver of vehicle bearing registration No.CH-01-AC-8860 was not holding a valid and effective driving license at the time of accident and there was wilful violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy. Further it was averred that insurance company was not liable to pay any compensation and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.

3. Learned Tribunal framed the following issues:

“1. Whether accident dated 12.09.2017 at about 8.37 PM resulting into death of Harmesh Lal occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of vehicle No.CH-01-AC-8860 by respondent No.1? OPP

2. Whether the claimants are entitled to compensation for death of Harmesh Lal, if so, to what extent and from whom? OPP

3. Whether the driver of offending vehicle was not holding a valid & effective driving license on the date of accident and the vehicle was being driven in violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy? OPR-3

4. Relief.”

4. On appraisal of record/ evidence, learned Tribunal decided issues No.1 & 2 in favour of claimants. Issue No.3 was decided against respondent No.3-Insurance Company. Consequently, a compensation of Rs.53,25,954/- was awarded to the claimants along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till actual realization.

5. Vide order dated 05.08.2021, this Court prima facie observed that appellant-Insurance Company should be granted recovery rights. Feeling aggrieved, appellant-Insurance Company preferred Civil Appeal No.44 of 2022 before the Supreme Court. Vide an interim order dated 17.11.2021, the Supreme Court while issuing notice of motion, stayed execution of judgment/ award passed by learned Tribunal subject to appellant’s depositing entire amount, as awarded by learned Tribunal within a period of four weeks. However, claimants were not permitted to withdraw the same unless permission is granted by the Supreme Court. Thereafter, aforesaid Civil Appeal was finally disposed of vide order dated 03.01.2022 by the Supreme Court directing aforesaid interim order to continue till final disposal of appeal pending before this Court. The Supreme Court also requested this Court to finally decide and dispose of the appea