BRANCH MANAGER Vs. BELAKERAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the Insurer in MVC No.32/2010 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Itinerary Court, Shikaripura ['Tribunal' for short] being aggrieved by the direction to pay a sum of Rs.1,91,500/-determined as compensation payable to the first to third respondents - the claimants along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum and recover such amounts from the fourth respondent - the insured and the owner of the motorcycle bearing No.KA-15-J-3849. The Tribunal has issued this direction while partly allowing the claimants - the respondents' claim petition in MVC No.32/2010 by its Judgment and Award dated 03.03.2012.

(2.) The petition in MVC No.32/2010 is filed by the parents and a sibling of the deceased, Sri.Prakash Basavarajappa, asserting that the deceased was driving his motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-15-J-3849, when the fourth respondent, who was rash and negligent in driving the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-27-L-7428 dashed against their son's motorcycle. Their son was fatally injured and he breathed his last when he was being shifted to the Hospital by an ambulance. The fourth and fifth respondents being the driver and the owner of the motorcycle bearing No.KA-27-L-7428 were arrayed as first and second respondents, and the insurer of this motorcycle bearing No.KA-27-L-7428 (the appellant) is arrayed as the third respondent. Insofar as the insurer-appellant, its essential defence was that the fourth respondent did not hold a driving licence and as such it would not be liable.

(3.) The Tribunal, while answering the additional Issue as regards whether the insurer-appellant is able to prove violation of a policy condition because the fourth respondent did not hold a valid licence, has found, on appreciation of evidence tendered by the fourth respondent and the pillion who was riding with him, that it is established that the fourth respondent did not hold a driving licence and therefore, there is breach of a policy condition. However, relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of ' National Insurance Co., Ltd., Bangalore v. Smt. Anjali and Others', 2011 [4] KCCR 3228 the Tribunal has directed the insurer-appellant to pay the compensation determined with interest and recover from the owner - insured, the fifth respondent.