An insurance company is not liable for accidents occurring when the driver's licence is expired; however, to protect the rights of third-party claimants, the court may direct the insurer to pay the compensation and recover it from the owner/driver.

NAFR

Judgment on Board

1. The present appeal calls in question the legality and correctness of the award dated 08.01.2018 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) (hereinafter referred to as the “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 89/2017, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has partly allowed the claim application preferred by the claimants and awarded a compensation of Rs. 7,45,000/- to be paid by non-applicants therein along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till its realization.

2. Heard on I.A. No. 02 of 2025, which is an application for condonation of delay of 2610 days in filing the cross-objection.

3. Learned counsel for the claimants/respondents No.1 to 5 submits that the delay, though substantial, is neither intentional nor deliberate, but has occurred due to bona fide circumstances. The claimants, belonging to a Scheduled Tribe community and residing in a remote rural area of District Ambikapur, Surguja, were not well-versed with the legal procedure and had initially relied upon local counsel. It is further submitted that upon receipt of notice from this Court in the appeal preferred by the Insurance Company, the claimants approached their counsel, and only thereafter came to know that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal was not computed in accordance with settled principles of law. Consequently, after obtaining proper legal advice, the present cross-objection has been filed.

4. Learned counsel submits that the delay deserves to be condoned in the interest of justice, particularly when the claimants have suffered the loss of their wife and mother in a motor accident and are seeking just compensation. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mahadev Govind Gharge and Others v. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2011) 6 SCC 321, to contend that the right to file cross-objection is not completely extinguished upon expiry of limitation and the Court is empowered to permit the same if sufficient cause is shown. It is thus prayed that this Court may kindly condone the delay in filing the cross-objection and take the same on record in the interest of justice.

5. Having considered the grounds mentioned in the application for condonation of delay, and in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mahadev Govind Gharge (supra), this Court is satisfied that the delay has been sufficiently explained and is neither deliberate nor intentional. The claimants, being from a remote tribal background, have demonstrated bona fide reasons which prevented them from approaching this Court within the prescribed period. Accordingly, the delay of 2610 days in filing the cross-objection is hereby condoned.

6. Brief facts of the case are that the claimants, being the son, daughter and husband of deceased Smt. Prabha Ekka, preferred a claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.42,60,000/- on account of her untimely death in a motor accident that occurred on 12.03.2014. On the said date, the deceased was travelling as a passenger in a bus bearing registration No.CG-14-A-4111 (for short, ‘offending vehicle’) from Raigarh to Kunkuri