( 1 ) THESE appeals have been preferred by the insurer assailing liability and the claimant praying for the enhancement in M. A. No. 1066 of 2002 whereas in M. A. No. 637 of 2002 the insurance company prayed that it cannot be made liable to pay compensation. Feeling aggrieved by the award dated 17-1-2002 passed by the VIII Additional Motor accidents Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur in Claim case No. 327 of 2001.

( 2 ) ON 12-5-1991 at about 4-30 a. m. Prasanna Kumar Jha was coming from mandla on his motor cycle. A car driven by prateek Pathak, the respondent No. 2 owned by Dr. Bina Pathak, insured with New India assurance Co. Ltd. , dashed the motor cycle as a result of which claimant sustained grievous injury on his left thigh.

( 3 ) THE owner in the separate written statement denied the allegations and contended that respondent No. 3 was never authorised by her to drive the vehicle, only son of the owner, namely, Piyush Pathak who possessed the valid licence was authorised to drive the vehicle. The vehicle was not driven by Prateek Pathak at the relevant time.

( 4 ) THE insurer in the written statement contended that Prateek did not possess driving licence at the time of accident and the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document