ORDER

Heard on IA No. 11402/2018, which is an application filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 197 days in filing of the appeal.

Learned counsel for respondent No.1 opposed the application. Considering the averments mentioned in the application, which is supported by affidavit, same is allowed and delay of 197 days in filing of the appeal is hereby condoned.

Accordingly, IA No. 11402/2018 stands disposed of. Heard on Admission.

Admit.

With the consent of parties, final arguments heard.

This Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 by the appellant/Insurance Company being aggrieved with the award dated 25/11/2017 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Harda (M.P.) in Motor Accident Claim Case No.19/2016, whereby, the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.85,455/- (Eighty five thousand and four hundred fifty five) with interest @ 6% from the date of filing of petition i.e. 30/09/2015 till date of realization. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 18/11/2014, the claimant Jitendra pastaria aged about 40 years was going on his motorcycle to village Beed and at about 8:15 p.m., when he was returning on his motorcycle to his village Jatrakheda and reached near Village Chanera, District Khandwa, one Auto bearing registration No. MP/12/R/1723 driven rashly and negligently by respondent No.2 and owned by respondent No.3 came in excessive speed and hit the motorcycle of claimant. In the alleged incident, claimant sustained various injuries in his body including fracture of his right hand and leg. FIR of alleged incident was lodged at Police Station Naya Harsood, where offences were registered against the driver of the auto and challan was filed before competent court. Claimants filed a claim petition before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Harda (M.P.) alleging that at the time of accident the offending vehicle was being driven by respondent No.2, owned by respondent no.3 and insured with appellant/Insurance Company. It was prayed that the claim petition be allowed and a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Ten lakhs) be awarded. 3. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have denied the allegations made in the claim petition and pleaded that no accident took place by alleged vehicle.

Alleged vehicle has falsely been implicated in the case, however, it was pleaded that on the date of incident, the alleged vehicle was insured with the appellant/Insurance Company. Therefore, if any amount of compensation is to be awarded, then it is the appellant/Insurance Company, who will be liable to pay compensation.

4. Appellant/insurance company in its written statement denied the averments mentioned in the claim petition and pleaded that at the time of alleged incident the driver of offending vehicle was not having valid permit to drive the vehicles. The offending vehicle was being driven in violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy. Hence, it was prayed that appellant/insurance company has no liability to pay any compensation and prays for dismissal of the petition against the insurance company.

5. After framing of issues and recording of evidence, learned tribunal held the respondent No.2/driver of offending vehicle responsible for causing the aforesaid accident. Thus, learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.85,455/- ( Eighty five thousand four hundred fifty five) alongwith interest @ 6% from the date of filing of petition till payment and also held the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 are liable to pay the compensation alongwith appellant/Insurance Company jointly and severally. Being aggrieved by the impugned award, appellant/Insurance Company has preferred the present miscellaneous appeal.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned Claims Tribunal committed an apparent error of law in holding that the auto was not plied in violation of terms and cond