NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. LAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) National Insurance Company -- the third respondent in O.P(MV) No. 384/1991 on the file of the M.A.C.T., Thrissur is the appellant. The appellant has no grievance against the award granting compensation to the claimant. Award is challenged on the ground that the Claims Tribunal fastened the appellant with liability to indemnify the owner of the vehicle ignoring the fact that there was no valid policy as on the date of the accident, i.e., 15.1.1991.

(2.) It is contended that though RW1 was examined on behalf of the appellant and Exts.B1 to B7 were produced and marked to show that there was no policy as on 15.1.1991, the Tribunal without adverting to those documents passed the award directing the Insurance Company to deposit the amount of Rs. 13,000/- with interest in the name of the claimant in a Nationalised Bank. In answer to issue No. 3, framed by the Tribunal, the award says that though the insurer denied the policy in its written statement, no evidence was adduced to prove the contention raised therein, and therefore, the insurer should be made liable to pay the compensation.

(3.) A perusal of the documents produced and the evidence adduced by the appellant clearly shows that the above findings made by the Tribunal in the impugned award are not on the basis of proved facts and materials on record. The findings entered as above, compelled the appellant to file I.A.2518/1997 before the Tribunal seeking review of the award. In the review petition, the appellant had brought to the notice of the Tribunal that sufficient evidence was adduced in support of the pleadings in the written statement and in the light of the facts stated in the deposition of AW1, the Tribunal ought to have found that there was, in effect, no valid policy covering the offending vehicle on 15.1.1991. Evidence was adduced by the appellant to show that the payment of premium by cheque did not materialise as the cheque was bounced for want of funds in the account of the 2nd respondent. The Tribunal on the basis of the provisions contained in Sections 147(5) and 149(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act held that the appellant had the statutory duty to indemnify the third parties and to satisfy the award of compensation, notwithstanding its entitlement to avoid or cancel the policy for the reason that the cheque issued for payment of premium was dishonoured. This view was taken quoting the judgment of the Supreme Court in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Inderjit Kaur and Ors., AIR 1998 SC 588. The Tribunal did not reserve the right of the insurer to recover the amount from the owner of the vehicle after satisfying the award, that is to say, by compensating the loss caused to the third party.