##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

M.A.C.M.A.Nos.3452 and 3502 of 2019

DATE: 21.04.2026

M.A.C.M.A.No.3452 of 2019

Between:

Pulimamidi Srikanth Goud and another

…..Appellants

AND

Thapetla Alivela and another

….Respondents

M.A.C.M.A.No. 3502 of 2019

Between:

Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Rep. by its Regional Manager, O/o 2^nd Floor, MIG-74, Dharma Reddy

Colony, Hyderabad.

…..Appellants

AND

Thapetla Alivela and two others

….Respondents

COMMON JUDGMENT

These two appeals arise out of the award dated 10.04.2019

passed in M.V.O.P. No.348 of 2017 by the learned XXVII Additional

Chief Judge-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, City Civil Court,

Secunderabad (for short, “the Tribunal”). While M.A.C.M.A. No.3452 of

2

2019 is preferred by respondent Nos.1 and 2 (driver and owner of the

offending vehicle), M.A.C.M.A.No.3502 of 2019 is preferred by the

Insurance Company.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will hereinafter be

referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the claimant, who is the

mother of the deceased, filed the claim petition under Section 166 of

the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation on account of the death

of her son in a road accident that occurred on 18.05.2017. It was her

case that the deceased, aged about 23 years, while proceeding on a

motorcycle, was hit by a tractor and trailer driven in a rash and

negligent manner, resulting in his death. The Tribunal, on

appreciation of the evidence of PW.2 coupled with Exs.A1 to A4, came

to the conclusion that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent

driving of the driver of the tractor and trailer and awarded a total

compensation of Rs.16,82,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum.

While fastening liability on respondent Nos.1 and 2, the Tribunal

directed the Insurance Company to pay the compensation at the first

instance and recover the same from the owner and driver. Assailing

the said award, both the present appeals came to be filed.

3

4. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 contended that the

Tribunal erred in directing pay and recover, as the driver was holding

a valid LMV driving licence and no separate endorsement was required

to drive the tractor and trailer.

5. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company contended that

the driver did not possess a valid transport licence and there was a

clear breach of policy conditions, and therefore, the Insurance

Company ought to have been exonerated from liability.

6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the claimants

supported the impugned award passed by the Tribunal and ultimately

prayed to dismiss both the appeals.

7. This Court, upon consideration of the entire material available

on record, finds that the Tribunal has rightly appreciated the evidence

in holding that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent

driving of the offending vehicle. The evidence of PW.2, who is an eye-

witness, remained unrebutted and there is no contra evidence placed

by respondent Nos.1 and 2 to disprove the said finding. Therefore, the

finding of the Tribunal on negligence does not warrant any

interference.

8. Coming to the issue of liability, though it is contended by the

learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 that the driver was

4

holding a valid driving licence, the material on record, including the

charge sheet, discloses that the driver did not possess the appropriate

licence to drive the transport vehicle. At the same time, it is well

settled that mere absence or invalidity of a driving licence is not

sufficient to absolve the insurer from liability towards third parties

unless it is established that the owner committed a willful breach of

policy conditions. In the present case, the Insurance Company has not

adduced cogent evidence to establish such willful breach on the part

of the owner. In those circumstances, the Tribunal has rightly applied

the principle of “pay and recover” and directed the Insurance

Company to satisf