Case Note & Summary
The case arises from a motor accident claim filed by the respondent no.1 (original applicant) before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Pune. The respondent no.1, along with his family, was traveling in an Indica car when an Innova car (offending vehicle) driven rashly and negligently collided with their vehicle, causing the death of his father, brother, driver, and subsequently his mother, and injuries to himself. The police registered a crime against the driver of the offending vehicle. The offending vehicle was owned by respondent no.3 and insured with the appellant insurance company. The respondent no.1 filed a claim petition (MACP No. 130 of 2009) seeking compensation. The Tribunal partly allowed the claim, awarding Rs.5,95,000/- with interest at 6% per annum, directing the appellant and respondent no.2 (driver) to pay jointly and severally. The appellant insurance company appealed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, primarily contending that the driver did not hold a valid driving license at the time of the accident, and thus the insurer should not be liable. The court considered the evidence, including the police investigation and the fact that the driver was deleted from the cause title. The court held that the finding of negligence was based on evidence and not perverse. Regarding the license issue, the court noted that the appellant admitted the vehicle was insured but the driver had no valid license. Applying the principle of 'pay and recover', the court held that the insurer is liable to pay compensation to third parties but can recover the amount from the owner. The quantum of compensation was not challenged on merits. The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was directed to pay the compensation and may recover from the owner.
Headnote
A) Motor Accident Claims - Negligence - Rash and Negligent Driving - The claimant established that the offending vehicle driven rashly and negligently caused the accident resulting in deaths and injuries - The Tribunal's finding of negligence was based on evidence and not perverse - Held that the finding of negligence is confirmed (Paras 2-5). B) Motor Accident Claims - Insurance - Breach of Policy Conditions - Pay and Recover - The driver did not possess a valid driving license at the time of the accident - The insurer is liable to pay compensation to third parties but can recover from the owner - Held that the appellant must pay compensation and may recover from the owner (Paras 6-8). C) Motor Accident Claims - Compensation - Quantum - The Tribunal awarded Rs.5,95,000/- with interest at 6% per annum - The appellant did not challenge the quantum on merits - Held that the quantum is not interfered with (Paras 9-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant insurance company is liable to pay compensation when the driver of the offending vehicle did not hold a valid driving license at the time of the accident, and whether the Tribunal erred in awarding compensation.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and award dated 28th July, 2015 passed by the MACT, Pune in MACP No. 130 of 2009 is confirmed. The appellant is directed to pay the compensation amount to the respondent no.1 within eight weeks. The appellant is at liberty to recover the amount from the owner of the offending vehicle (respondent no.3) in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Motor Vehicles Act
- 1988
- Section 173
- Section 140
- Section 147
- Section 149
- breach of policy conditions
- pay and recover
- negligence
- rash and negligent driving
- compensation
- interest
