In motor accident claims involving third parties, the insurer is liable to satisfy the award even if there is a breach of policy conditions (such as lack of a valid driving license), subject to the right to recover the amount from the insured.

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.10.2012 PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.739/2011 BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AND ADDL. MACT DHARWAD, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION & ETC.

THIS MFA COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI

ORAL JUDGMENT

Challenging judgment and award dated 04.10.2012, passed by Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM & Additonal MACT, Dharwad, (‘Tribunal’ for short) in MVC no.739/2011, this appeal is filed.

Sri NR Kuppelur, learned counsel for appellant submitted that, appeal was by insurer challenging finding of Tribunal on liability of insurer. It was submitted, as per claimant at 06:00 p.m. on 22.02.2011, Girish Betasur, along with Sanjay was riding motorcycle no.KA-25/ED-9221 on Laxmeshwar-Hubli road, rider of another motorcycle no.KA-31/J-1787 rode it in rash and negligent manner and dashed against motorcycle of Girish Betasur causing accident. In accident, Girish Betasur sustained serious injuries and died on spot. Alleging loss of dependency on account of untimely death, his wife and mother filed claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (‘MV Act’ for short), against rider, owner and insurer of offending motorcycle.

Despite service of summons, rider did not appear and was placed ex-parte. Owner/insurer opposed claim petition on all counts including denial of liability, violation of policy conditions and accident being due to rash and negligent riding of motorcycle by deceased himself. Based on pleadings, Tribunal framed issues and recorded evidence.

Claimant no.1 along with another deposed as PW1 and PW2 and got marked Exs.P1 to P13. Official of insurer deposed as RW1 and got marked Exs.R1 to R3. On consideration, Tribunal held accident had occurred due to rash and negligent riding of motorcycle by its rider and as it was insured, insurer was liable to pay compensation assessed by it at ₹9,35,000/- with interest at 6% per annum. Assailing award on liability, this appeal is filed.

It was submitted by learned counsel for insurer that rider of insured motorcycle i.e. KA-31/J-1787 did not have valid and effective driving licence as on date of accident. In order to substantiate same, certified copy of driving license extract were got marked as Ex.R2. Ex.R2 would disclose that deceased was having driving licence to drive LMV non-transport car effective from 18.11.2006 and Transport vehicle and public service vehicle and bus with effect from 24.12.2011. Whereas, he was riding a motorcycle. This would establish that he was not having valid and effective driving license to drive a particular class of vehicle that he was driving or riding at time of accident. The same would be breach of terms and conditions of policy and therefore prayed for absolving liability of insurance.

On other hand, Sri SM Kalwad, learned counsel for respondent no.1 submitted that deceased was a pillion rider on a motorcycle. It was submitted that appellant was insurer of offending motorcycle i.e. KA-31/J-1787. Whereas, deceased was a pillion rider on other motorcycle bearing no.KA-25/ED-9221. As such, he would be a third party and in view of decision of full bench in case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Bijapur v. Yallavva w/o. Yamanappa Dharanakeri , reported in 2020 (2) AKR 484, insurer cannot escape liability against third party. On said ground, sought for dismissal of appeal.

Heard learned counsel, perused judgment, award and record.

From above, point that arises for consideration is,

“Whether finding of Tribunal on liability calls for interference?”

Same is answered partly in affirmative for following reason.

At outset, there is no dispute about claimants relying upon police investigation records to establish actionable negligence against owner and rider of motorcycle no.KA-31/J- 1787. There is no dispute about