Insurer's obligation to compensate third-party claims persists despite policy violations, reaffirming statutory protection for victims.

JUDGMENT

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company against the award dated 08.04.2025 passed in M.C.O.P.No.766 of 2022 by the Special Subordinate Judge / Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thanjavur.

2. The first respondent / claimant has filed a claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.766 of 2022, claiming compensation for the injuries sustained by him, in an accident that took place on 10.05.2022. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.2,85,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs and Eighty Five Thousand only) with interest at 7.5% per annum as compensation.

For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties herein after will be referred as per their status/ranking in the Tribunal.

3. A brief substance of the claim petition is as follows:

The claimant was aged about 72 years and was doing agricultural work and was earning Rs.50,000/- per month. On 10.05.2022 at about 03.40 p.m., when the claimant was walking in Kandiyur to Ayyampettai road from East to West direction on the left side of the road, a TVS SUPER XL two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-48-CF-5073, which came from North to South direction in a rash and negligent manner, had dashed against the claimant and as a result, the claimant sustained grievous multiple injuries. The claimant was immediately taken to Government Hospital, Thanjavur. Due to the accidental injuries, he is not in a position to do his normal avocation. The claimant spent huge amount for treatment, medicines, conveyance and other charges. The claim petition was filed by the claimant seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.50,00,000/-.

4. The first respondent, owner of the vehicle, remained ex-parte before the Tribunal and the claim petition was opposed by the insurer.

5. A brief substance of the counter filed by the insurer is as follows:

The manner of the accident of the claimant is all denied. The first respondent vehicle rider was not possessing valid driving license. The claim of compensation is excessive and exorbitant.

6. On the side of the claimant, 1 witness was examined as P.W.1 and

6 documents were marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.6. On the side of the insurer, 1 witness was examined as R.W.1 and 9 documents were marked as Ex.R.1 to Ex.R.9. The disability certificate of the claimant was marked as Ex.C.1.

7. The learned trial Judge, after considering the evidence, both oral and documentary, has passed the impugned award dated 08.04.2025, holding that the first respondent's vehicle rider was responsible for the accident and directed the insurer to pay the award amount of Rs.2,85,000/- to the claimant and then to recover the same from the first respondent. Aggrieved by the said award, the insurer has come up with the present appeal.

8. It is pertinent to note that the insurer has not challenged the finding of the Tribunal and that they have also not challenged the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

9. The only contention of the learned counsel appearing for the insurer is that since the terms and conditions of the Policy was violated by allowing a person to drive the two wheeler without valid driving license, the insurer cannot be fastened even with the liability of pay and recovery and that after amendment to the Motor Vehicles Act by the Central Act 32 of 2019 and the deletion of proviso to Section 149 (4) of the Motor Vehicles Act, the Tribunal cannot order pay and recovery.

10. It is not in dispute that the first respondent is the owner of the two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-48-CF-5073 and the same was insured with the insurer and that the insurance policy was in force on on the date of accident.

11. The points for consideration are:-

(i) Whether the Tribunal is empowe