Case Note & Summary
The present appeals arise out of a common judgment and order dated 30th September 2016 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Washim, in various claim petitions filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The accident occurred on 21st June 2013 involving a truck bearing registration No. MH-37/1234 (as per the judgment text, but the actual number is not clearly mentioned; however, the truck was owned by Abdul Rahim s/o Sk. Lal). The truck met with an accident resulting in the death of three persons and injuries to one person. The legal representatives of the deceased and the injured person filed claim petitions before the Tribunal seeking compensation. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence, awarded compensation to the claimants. The Insurance Company, being the insurer of the truck, filed these appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the award on the ground that the driver of the truck did not possess a valid driving licence at the time of the accident, and therefore, there was a breach of policy conditions. The Insurance Company also contended that the quantum of compensation awarded was excessive. The claimants supported the award and argued that the Insurance Company failed to prove the alleged breach. The Court, after hearing the parties, held that the Insurance Company did not adduce any evidence to prove that the driver did not have a valid driving licence. The burden to prove breach of policy conditions lies on the insurer, and the Insurance Company failed to discharge that burden. The Court further held that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was just and proper and did not warrant any interference. Accordingly, the appeals were dismissed.
Headnote
A) Motor Accident Claims - Compensation for Death - Sections 166, 168 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The claimants, legal representatives of deceased persons who died in a truck accident, sought compensation - The Tribunal awarded compensation - The Insurance Company appealed challenging quantum and liability - Held that the Tribunal correctly assessed compensation and the Insurance Company failed to prove breach of policy conditions (Paras 1-10). B) Motor Accident Claims - Compensation for Injury - Sections 166, 168 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The claimant, an injured person in the same accident, sought compensation for injuries - The Tribunal awarded compensation - The Insurance Company appealed - Held that the compensation awarded was just and fair, and no interference was warranted (Paras 1-10). C) Insurance Law - Breach of Policy Conditions - Burden of Proof - The Insurance Company alleged that the driver did not have a valid driving licence - The burden to prove breach of policy conditions lies on the insurer - The Insurance Company failed to adduce evidence to establish the breach - Held that the insurer is liable to pay compensation (Paras 5-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Claims Tribunal erred in awarding compensation to the claimants and whether the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation despite alleged breach of policy conditions.
Final Decision
The appeals are dismissed. The judgment and order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Washim, dated 30th September 2016, are confirmed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Motor Vehicles Act
- 1988
- Section 166
- Section 168
- Section 173
- Compensation for death and injury
- Breach of policy conditions
- Burden of proof on insurer
- Negligence of driver
- Contributory negligence
- Quantum of compensation
