The insurer must prove that the insured's breach of policy conditions is willful to avoid liability, even if the driver holds a fake license.

1. Fastening of liability upon appellant insurance company and awarding penal interest to the claimant is the subject - matter of this appeal filed by the insurance company, challenging the impugned award dated 6.9.2013 passed in Claim Case No. 95 of 2013 by the 5th Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Durg (for short 'Claims Tribunal').

2. Facts of the case in a nutshell are that on 20.1.2011 at about 11 a.m., Gaurav Sethi was travelling on his motor cycle bearing No. CG 07 - LR 6912 along with Durgesh Rao as pillion and going to Dhamdha from Durg. On the way, one truck bearing No. CG 07 - LR 4022 (for short 'offending vehicle') driven by respondent No. 3 / NA 1 dashed the motor cycle. In the said accident, Gaurav Sethi suffered grievous injuries over his person and he was taken to Sector - 9 hospital at Bhilai, where he was declared to be dead. Claimants, who are parents of deceased Gaurav Sethi, filed claim application claiming Rs. 19,48,000 as compensation.

3. Respondent No. 3 / driver of offending vehicle remained ex parte before the learned Claims Tribunal.

4. Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 / NAs 1 and 2, driver and owner respectively, submitted reply to claim application and denied all adverse pleadings made against them in claim application. They pleaded that offending vehicle was running with a limited speed but motor cycle driven negligently and rashly came in front of the offending vehicle and met with an accident; there was no negligence on the part of driver of offending vehicle; there was no licence with deceased Gaurav Sethi to drive motor cycle on the date of accident. Offending vehicle was insured with NA 3 / insurance company, as such, it is not liable for payment of any amount of compensation.

5. Appellant insurance company submitted reply to claim application stating therein that intimation of accident was not forwarded to the insurance company. On the date of accident, i.e., 20.1.2011, driver of offending vehicle was not possessing valid and effective driving licence. It was also pleaded that as there was accident between two motor vehicles, there will be contributory negligence on the part of driver of motor cycle also. Accident is on account of negligence on the part of deceased - Gaurav Sethi, driver of motor cycle. There was no valid permit and fitness of offending vehicle and prayed for exoneration of insurance company from paying amount of compensation.

6. Learned Claims Tribunal, based upon pleadings of respective parties, formulated as many as 9 issues for consideration, including the issue with regard to contributory negligence and also whether on the date of accident, respondent No. 3 / NA 1 / driver of offending vehicle was not possessing valid and effective driving licence.

7. Learned Claims Tribunal, on appreciation of pleading and evidence, has held that contributory negligence was found not to be proved and the issue with regard to the valid and effective driving licence with driver of offending vehicle / NA 1 has been found to be proved. Learned Claims Tribunal, after recording findings with regard to other issues, held that insurance company failed to prove any failure on the part of owner of offending vehicle in taking proper care while engaging NA 1 to drive the offending vehicle and held the insurance company liable for satisfying amount of compensation. Learned Claims Tribunal, after calculating total amount of compensation of Rs. 5,01,000 to be awarded to the claimants, awarded 7 per cent interest from the date of filing of claim application and further interest of 11 per cent, in case insurance company failed to satisfy the amount of compensation within a period of 30 days from the date of passing of award