Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 24658
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P.SOMARAJAN, J
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY – Appellant
Versus
DHANISH U.S – Respondent
MACA 3507 2018
RAJI T.BHASKAR, SRI.B.S.SURESH (CHIRAKKARA)
The requirement of a valid driving license is crucial in determining the liability of insurance claims arising from vehicle accidents.
Headnote:
Driving License - Insurance Liability - Motor Vehicles Act - Section 3(1) - The court emphasized the necessity of a valid driving license and the implications of its absence for insurance liability, leading to a remand for reconsideration of pay and recovery against the vehicle owner.
Fact of the Case:
The Insurance Company appealed the decision of the trial court, which dismissed its application for the production of the rider's valid driving license in a vehicle accident case, impacting the assessment of liability.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the trial court did not adequately address the respondent's failure to produce a valid driving license, leading to an unclear status regarding liability and necessitating a remand for reconsideration.
Issues: Whether the absence of a valid driving license at the time of the accident affects the liability of the insurance company and the vehicle owner.
Ratio Decidendi: The lack of a valid driving license raises significant concerns regarding liability under the insurance policy, warranting the need for a thorough examination by the trial court.
Final Decision: The appeal is allowed in part, and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal for consideration of pay and recovery.
The appellant, Insurance Company, came up on the ground that the trial court did not take into consideration the specific pleading raised by the Insurance Company with respect to non-production of a valid driving license of the rider of the vehicles involved in the accident. An application was also submitted, directing the second respondent, owner of the vehicle, to produce the valid driving license and it has find a place in the impugned award. It is not mentioned whether it was filed subsequent to the final argument or earlier to that. On the other hand, it was made mentioned in the impugned judgment that the abovesaid application was ultimately dismissed without assigning a proper reason. It is not clear why no direction was issued to the second respondent, owner of the vehicle, to produce a valid driving license as on the date of alleged accident. It is true that there is no Section 3 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 , charge in the final report submitted. But that does not mean that there was a valid driving license as on the date of alleged accident. In the said circumstance, the appellant, Insurance Company, pressed for remand of the matter to the trial court to consider the question of pay and recovery. There is no dispute with respect to the quantum arrived at by the Tribunal under various heads and the interest ordered. Policy is also admitted. Hence, there will be an initial liability for the Insurance Company to pay the entire amount awarded. Without altering the same, the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for consideration of the question of “pay and recovery” issue involved in the case as against the second respondent, the owner of the vehicle. Hence, the award passed by the Tribunal exonerating the second respondent from liability will stand set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for the consideration of the abovesaid question. The parties shall appear before the Tribunal on 22/08/2023.
The appeal will stand allowed in part accordingly. No costs.
