Bombay High Court Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Upholds Compensation for Death of 30-Year-Old Travels Business Owner. Insurer Fails to Prove Driver's Lack of Valid License, Adverse Inference Drawn Against Insurer.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Prosecution
  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal arises from a judgment and order dated 02/11/2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandrapur in Claim Petition No.142 of 2001, awarding compensation of Rs.5,99,940/- to the claimants (parents and sister of deceased Nishant Pandey) for his death in a motor vehicle accident. The accident occurred on 11/09/2001 at about 5:30 pm when the deceased was riding a motorcycle bearing No.MH34G-964 from Mul to Chandrapur. A truck bearing No.MTG 9952, driven by respondent No.4 (Tulshiram Soyam) and owned by respondent No.5 (M/s Prakash Tiles Factory), came at high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle. The deceased sustained fatal injuries and died in the Government Hospital at Chandrapur. At the time of death, the deceased was 30 years old, unmarried, and running a Travels business with four buses, earning more than Rs.20,000 per month. The claimants filed a claim petition seeking Rs.22,00,000/- compensation from the appellant (Oriental Insurance Company) and respondents 4 and 5. The appellant resisted the petition raising three defences: (1) the driver of the truck did not have a valid driving license; (2) the income claimed was exorbitant; and (3) the motorcycle owner and its insurer were not joined, making the petition bad for non-joinder. Respondents 4 and 5 did not appear despite service. The Tribunal rejected all defences and awarded compensation. The Insurance Company appealed. The High Court considered the issues and held that the Tribunal's assessment of notional income at Rs.3,000 per month was reasonable in the absence of documentary evidence. Regarding the driving license, the Court noted that the appellant failed to produce the license or examine the owner/driver to prove willful breach of policy conditions, and thus an adverse inference was drawn against the appellant. On non-joinder, the Court held that the claim against a tortfeasor is maintainable even if other joint tortfeasors are not joined. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Motor Accident Claims - Compensation - Assessment of Income - Deceased aged 30 years, earning Rs.20,000 per month from Travels business - Tribunal assessed notional income at Rs.3,000 per month - Held that in absence of documentary evidence, notional income of Rs.3,000 per month is reasonable (Paras 7-8).

B) Motor Accident Claims - Driving License - Burden of Proof - Insurance Company must prove willful breach of policy conditions - Failure to produce driving license or examine owner/driver leads to adverse inference - Held that appellant failed to prove that driver had no valid license (Paras 9-10).

C) Motor Accident Claims - Non-joinder of Necessary Parties - Claim against tortfeasor is maintainable even if other joint tortfeasors are not joined - Held that non-joinder of motorcycle owner and insurer is not fatal (Para 11).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Insurance Company can avoid liability on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have a valid driving license, and whether the non-joinder of the motorcycle owner and its insurer is fatal to the claim.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandrapur dated 02/11/2004 in Claim Petition No.142 of 2001 is confirmed. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Motor Accident Claims
  • Compensation
  • Driving License
  • Adverse Inference
  • Breach of Policy Conditions
  • Joint and Several Liability
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2017 LawText (BOM) (07) 191

First Appeal No.235 of 2006

2017-07-14

Dr (Smt) Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi, J.

Shri D. N. Kukday for appellant/Insurance Company

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited

Rajkumari w/o Laxmikant Pandey, Laxmikant s/o Shivjatan Prasad Pandey, Vandana d/o Laxmikant Pandey, Tulshiram s/o Kisan Soyam, M/s Prakash Tiles Factory

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against award of compensation by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal

Remedy Sought

Insurance Company sought to set aside the award of compensation

Filing Reason

Insurance Company challenged the Tribunal's order on grounds of invalid driving license, exorbitant income assessment, and non-joinder of necessary parties

Previous Decisions

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandrapur awarded Rs.5,99,940/- in Claim Petition No.142 of 2001 on 02/11/2004

Issues

Whether the Insurance Company can avoid liability on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have a valid driving license? Whether the non-joinder of the motorcycle owner and its insurer is fatal to the claim?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the driver of the truck was not having valid and effective driving license. Appellant argued that the income quoted by claimants was on higher side and compensation was exorbitant. Appellant argued that the motorcycle owner and its insurer were not joined as party respondents, making the claim petition bad for non-joinder of necessary parties.

Ratio Decidendi

The Insurance Company failed to prove willful breach of policy conditions by not producing the driving license or examining the owner/driver, leading to an adverse inference. Non-joinder of other joint tortfeasors is not fatal to the claim.

Judgment Excerpts

This appeal is preferred by the Insurance company of the offending vehicle which is held jointly and severally liable for payment of compensation amount of Rs.5,99,940/ by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandrapur vide its judgment and order dated 02/11/04 in C. P. No.142 of 2001. Appellant herein has raised three defences. The first being that the driver of the truck was not having valid and effective driving license. Secondly, the income which is quoted by the claimants was on higher side... Thirdly, it was submitted that the motor cycle was also involved in the accident but its owner and Insurance company of the Motorcycle were not joined as party respondent and therefore claim petition was bad for nonjoinder of necessary parties. In the present case, the appellant has not produced the driving license of the driver of the truck. The appellant has also not examined the owner of the truck or the driver to prove that the driver did not have a valid driving license. Therefore, an adverse inference is drawn against the appellant.

Procedural History

Claim Petition No.142 of 2001 was filed before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandrapur. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.5,99,940/- on 02/11/2004. The Insurance Company filed First Appeal No.235 of 2006 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. The appeal was heard and dismissed on 14/07/2017.

Acts & Sections

  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds NCLAT Decision Setting Aside NCLT Orders Approving Resolution Plans for Earth Infrastructures Limited. Dispute Involves GNIDA's Claim Over Land Leased to Special Purpose Company and Its Subsidiaries, and the Validity of Resoluti...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Leave to Appeal in Cheque Dishonour Case — Acquittal Upheld Due to Failure to Prove Debt or Liability. The court held that the complainant failed to establish the existence of a legally enforceable debt or liability as r...