RASIKABEN BHOGILAL PATEL Vs. NITINBHAI BUDDHISINH GOHIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present First Appeal is filed under Sec. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order dtd. 30/8/2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Vadodara, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.687 of 2009, by which, the application under Sec. 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act filed by the claimant is allowed by the Tribunal, directing the opponents No.1 and 2 i.e. driver and owner to pay the amount of interim compensation of Rs.25,000.00 with 7.5% interest per annum, to the claimant, jointly and severally, by exonerating opponent No.3 - insurance company from the liability.

(2.) Brief facts of the present case are that, on 16/5/2009 at about 4:45 pm, the claimant was travelling in Autorickshaw bearing registration No.GJ-06-UU-5504 on National Highway No.8, one truck has come in rash and negligent manner and with full speed and dashed with the autorickshaw near Darjipura Bridge. The rickshaw got turn turtle and the claimant, along with other passengers, received serious injuries. She immediately shifted to the hospital. Due to this accident, the claimant has received permanent disability. Therefore, she filed a claim petition before the Tribunal for getting compensation. The claimant has also filed an application under Sec. 140 of the M.V. Act for claiming interim compensation of Rs.25,000.00 under the head of 'No-Fault Liability'. After hearing the respective parties, the Tribunal has allowed the said application and granted compensation of Rs.25,000.00 holding opponents No.1 and 2 i.e. driver and owner liable, jointly and severally and exonerating the opponent No.3 - insurance company from the liability. Therefore, being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned order dtd. 30/8/2012, the appellant - original claimant has preferred this appeal before this Court inter alia praying to hold the insurance company liable to pay the compensation as per the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court time and again.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. Hiren Modi for the appellant - original claimant has submitted that the impugned order is passed under Sec. 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, whereby the Tribunal has exonerated the insurance company from the liability to pay the compensation, by observing that there is breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy, as the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding any valid and effective driving license and therefore he was not authorised to drive the vehicle i.e. Autorickshaw - three wheeler and / or any transport vehicle. Therefore, the Tribunal has committed an error by exonerating the insurance company. He has submitted that this controversy is settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mukund Dewangan versus Oriental Insurance Company Limited reported in (2017) 14 SCC 663, therefore, the finding of the Tribunal is ex-facie perverse and erroneous. He has submitted that on this line, our High Court has also directed the Insurance Company to deposit the amount within eight weeks and granted some disbursement (70-30) in First Appeal No.2752 of 2016 and other cognate appeal dtd. 10/10/2017 and this Court has also directed the Tribunal to expedite the hearing of the main claim petition. He has submitted that therefore, identical order may be passed in the present appeal. He has submitted that the claim petition is of the year 2009 and still it is pending for final adjudication. He has submitted that this appeal may be allowed.