The insurer remains liable to pay compensation despite the driver's invalid licence, per Section 149(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed by the claimants in OP(MV) No.678 of 2012 on the files of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam, claiming enhancement of compensation. The respondents herein were the respondents before the tribunal.

2. The case of the claimants was that on 27.03.2012, while the deceased was travelling in an autorickshaw bearing Reg.No.KL-05/AC-1077 driven by the first respondent in a rash and negligent manner, it hit against a compound wall, whereby he sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The claimants, being the legal heirs of the deceased, approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of ₹11,68,000/-.

3. The first respondent, who was the owner-cum-driver of the offending vehicle, filed a written statement, denying negligence and disputing the liability and quantum of compensation. The second respondent insurer filed a written statement, admitting the policy coverage for the offending vehicle, but disputing the liability and quantum of compensation claimed. It was contended that the first respondent was not having a valid driving licence at the time of the accident. RW1 & RW2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A7 and B1 were marked. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, held that the accident took place on account of the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle and assessed a sum of ₹11,80,500/- as compensation under different heads. However, finding that the claimants’ claim was limited to ₹11,68,000/-, the tribunal held that the claimants are entitled to get only ₹11,68,000/- with interest @ 8.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization and proportionate costs. Further, on the ground that the first respondent/driver did not possess a valid driving licence and thereby violated the policy conditions, the first respondent/owner was held liable to pay compensation to the claimants, and the second respondent/insurer was exonerated from liability. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal as well as challenging the exoneration of the insurer from liability, the claimants have come up in appeal.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent insurer.

5. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the exoneration of the insurer from the liability to pay the award amount for the reason that there was no valid driving licence for the first respondent is per se illegal. I find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants. Absence of a driving licence, amounts to a violation under Section 149 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act , and the insurer is liable to pay the amount and thereafter, recover the amount from the owner of the vehicle. In National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh [2004 (3) SCC 297] , it was held by the apex court that mere absence, fake or invalid driving licence or disqualification of the driver for driving at the relevant time, are not in themselves defences available to the insurer against either the insured or the third parties and the insurer will have to pay and then recover the same from the owner. Since the violation alleged is the absence of a valid driving licence, I find that the insurer is liable to pay the compensation amount and then recover the same from the owner of the vehicle.

6. The learned counsel for the appellants claims enhancement under the following heads:

6.1. Notional income - The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the deceased was a daily labourer and was earning ₹12,500/- per month, however, the tribunal has fixed the monthly income notionally only at ₹5,000/-. The learned counsel for the appellant fur