ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SHAHNAWAZ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant Oriental Insurance Company Limited (the Insurance Company) impugns a judgment dated 03.09.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) in Claim Petition No.20/2008 whereby a compensation of Rs. 5,05,000/- was awarded in favour of the respondents Nos. 1 to 3 for the death of one Aabid who died in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 25.04.2005.

(2.) The only ground of challenge raised in the instant appeal is that Ranjeet Singh (Respondent No.5) driver of the offending Tata Sumo bearing registration No.HR-55-AD-9530 possessed a licence to drive LMV (NT); thus he was not entitled to drive a commercial vehicle. The owner Jagar Singh (Respondent No.4) gave the vehicle to be driven by a person who did not possess a valid driving licence to drive a commercial transport vehicle. Thus, the appellant insurance company was entitled to be exonerated, in any case, the appellant was entitled to recovery rights.

(3.) It is admitted case of the parties that the vehicle involved in the accident, that is, HR-55-AD-9530 a Tata Sumo was registered as a tourist taxi. The Claims Tribunal while dealing with the issue of liability while relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Swaran Singh & Ors., 2004 3 SCC 297 held that every proven breach of the policy will not entitle the insurer to avoid his liability. Whether Tata Sumo was registered as a commercial vehicle or a non-commercial vehicle will not make any difference. Since Tata Sumo was covered within the category of LMV, the Insurance Company will not be entitled to take the plea of the breach of the terms and conditions of the policy. Paras 60 to 64 of the impugned judgment dealing with the issue of liability are extracted hereunder:-