The insurance company is liable for an accident caused by an unauthorized driver. Driving without a license does not absolve the insurance company from liability.

T.S. Doabia, J.

1. Prem Narayan Bhatnagar is partially dissatisfied with the award of the M.A.C.T. According to him, the insurance company is equally liable to pay the compensation and the award given by the Claims Tribunal absolving the insurance company on the ground that the offending vehicle was being driven by a person who was not duly authorised is not in accordance with law.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the claimant was 55 years of age at the time of the accident. It is stated that on 2.1.1990 he was going on his Luna along with his friend. When he reached the library near Motimahal, a motor-cyclist driving Bullet motor cycle bearing No. MPH 4492 hit him. He sustained bodily injuries. Tibia and fibula bones of his right leg were fractured. He had stated that he had to stay in the nursing home and his leg was put in plaster twice. The Claims Tribunal awarded the compensation amounting to Rs. 45,274/-. This was given under the following heads:

Medical expenses Rs. 4,274/-

Food Rs. 1,000/-

Mental pain and

suffering Rs. 10,000/-

Permanent disability Rs. 30,000/-

--------------

Total Rs. 45,274/-

--------------

3. The insurance company has filed cross-objections. The quantum of compensation has been disputed.

4. I have gone through the facts of this case. The insurance company has been wrongly absolved. The plea which found favour with the Tribunal was that the person who was driving the motor cycle was not driving the same with the consent of the owner. Merely because the owner of the motor cycle was not driving the motor cycle is no ground to absolve the insurance company from its liability for the accident.

5. In Baldeo Raj alias Kaka v. Deowati 1986 ACJ 906 (Allahabad), a truck driven by the conductor caused accident with a rickshaw while the driver was sitting by his side. It was held that the owner of the truck was liable. Again in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Lakhi Ram Prabhu Dayal 1988 ACJ 443 (Delhi), an accident was caused by a mechanic when he had taken the motor cycle for trial run after repairs. The owner was held to be vicariously liable. In Putchala Achayamma v. Pelava Ramakrishna Rao 1988 ACJ 951 (AP), driver of the lorry entrusted the driving to the cleaner and the cleaner caused accident killing the driver and another person. The owner of the vehicle contended that the deceased driver had brought death upon himself by unauthorisedly allowing the cleaner to drive the vehicle. It was held that the owner cannot be absolved of his liability.

6. In this case, there is nothing to suggest that the driver was driving the vehicle unauthorisedly or that the owner had not consented the vehicle being driven by a person driving the same. As such, the award given by the Tribunal absolving the insurance company cannot be sustained.

7. Counsel for the insurance company has raised another argument. This is to the effect that the person who was driving the vehicle was not having a licence. The question as to whether this would absolve the insurance company has been examined in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Hukum Singh Writ Petition No. 975 of 1994; decided on 31.10.1994. It was held that the insurance company is liable. Reliance was placed on a decision given by the Supreme Court in Skandia Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kokilaben Chandravadan 1987 ACJ 411 (SC). It was observed:

To construe the provision differently would be to rewrite the provision by engrafting a rider to the effect that in the event of the motor vehicle happening to be driven by an unlicensed person, regardless of the circumstances in which such a contingency occurs, the insurer will not be liable under the contract of insurance. It needs to be emphasised that it is not the contract of insurance which is being interpreted. It is the statutory provision defining the conditions of exemption which is being interpreted. These must, therefore, be interpreted in the spirit in which the same have been enacted accompanied by an anxiety to ensure that the protection