The principle of 'pay and recover' in the context of the liability of the Insurance Company under the Motor Vehicles Act.

JUDGMENT

1. This Misc. Appeal under Sec. 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed against the award dtd. 05/08/2016 passed by Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Lahar, Disrict Bhind (M.P.) in Claim Case No.06/2016 by which the issue no.3 in respect to the liability is decided in favour of the Insurance Company resulting the exoneration of the Insurance Company from the liability of compensation.

2. The necessary facts for the disposal of the present appeal in short are that on 19/5/2015 at about 5:30 p.m., appellant was standing near the house of one Munnalal Sharma beside the road and was talking with someone. Thereafter, his father arrived there, at that time, one Mahindra Commander Jeep bearing registration No. MP06-B-6487 coming from opposite side being driven very rash and negligent manner by the driver of the aforesaid Jeep hit to the appellant, due to which, appellant fell down on the road and wheel of the vehicle passed over his left leg, due to which, appellant sustained grievous injuries on various parts of his body and also sustained fracture on the left leg. Initially, appellant was brought to primary health center Mihona. Thereafter, Primary Health Center, Raun. Lastly, he was referred to District Hospital Bhind (M.P.), wherein MLC was carried out and he was admitted on the same day. His injuries were examined, X-ray were taken and operation were carried out. In the X-ray, fracture of left leg was found. Appellant was remained under treatment in the District Hospital Bhind (M.P.) for a long time. Thereafter, again he was got admitted in the District Hospital Bhind (M.P.) and his injuries were examined and operation was carried out. During treatment in hospital and after that appellant spent more money, suffered pain and permanent disability as 25%.

3. The First Information Report was lodged against the driver of the offending vehicle in police station Mihona Distt. Bhind (M.P.) registered at crime No.33/2015 under Ss. 279, 337 & 338 of IPC. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed.

4. For claiming compensation due to injuries on account of accident, appellant preferred claim petition before learned Claims Tribunal against all the respondents, stating therein that appellant was 19 year old young and healthy boy and he was doing the work of labour and also doing the work of selling milk from which he was earning 10,000/- per month because of accident appellant suffered 25% permanent disability. Hence, appellant claimed Rs.5,00,000.00 from all the respondents.

5. The respondents No.1, 2 and respondent No.3/Insurance Company appeared before the learned Claims Tribunal filed their written statement and denied each and every content made in the claim petition. Insurance Company stated in its written statement that at the time of accident, vehicle was being used in the violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy and without effective and valid driving license. Hence, Insurance Company prayed for dismissal the claim petition against the Insurance Company.

6. Claims Tribunal framed issues and recorded evidence produced by the parties and after hearing arguments of both the parties, partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.1,50,000.00.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that Claims Tribunal while deciding issue No.3 with regard to liability of Insurance Company decided in favor of Insurance Company, exonerating it from the liability on the ground that at the time of accident, driver of the offending vehicle was not having valid driving license. It is further submitted that even if respondent no.1 was not holding valid driving license to drive the offending vehicle, still Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation, which can be recovered from respondents No.1 & 2. It is submitted that Insurance Company did not produce any oral as well as documentary evidence with respect to driving license, therefore, burden lies on respondent No.3/Insurance Company