UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. E RAJAMANICKAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the insurance company challenging the award dated 31.08.2009 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No. I), Salem, in M.C.O.P. No. 207 of 2005.

(2.) It is the case of the 1st Respondent/claimant before the Tribunal that on 24.12.2004 while he was walking towards the old bus stand, Salem on Anna Nagar Housing Board Road, a TVS 50 XL Super bearing registration No. TN-30-F-1931 came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him and thus, caused the accident. At the time of the accident, the said two wheeler was driven by one Mariappan. For the injuries sustained in the accident, the claimant made a claim for a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs against the owner of the vehicle, the 2nd Respondent herein as well as the insurer of the vehicle, the Appellant herein. The Appellant insurance company contested the claim petition by taking a defence that at the time of accident, the rider of the two wheeler did not possess a driving licence to drive that vehicle and as such, the claim petition against them has to be dismissed. In order to prove the claim, the claimant examined himself as P.W.1 besides examining one doctor as P.W.2 and marked Exs.A-1 to A-10 and on the side of the insurance company, one Sankaranarayanan was examined as R.W.1 and Exs.B-1 to B-3 were marked. The Tribunal, after analysing the evidence both oral and documentary, awarded a sum of Rs. 74,163/- and directed the owner as well as the insurer of the vehicle to pay the same. Aggrieved over the same, the insurance company has filed the present appeal.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Appellant insurance company submitted that when the rider of the vehicle did not have any driving licence at the time of accident, the insurance company cannot be made liable to pay the compensation amount. Therefore, the finding of the Tribunal in fixing the liability on the part of the insurance company to be set aside and consequently, the Appellant has has to be exonerated from their liability in paying the compensation. In support of his contentions, the learned Counsel has also relied upon the decisions reported in the case of Sardari and Ors. v. Sushil Kumar and Ors., 2008 1 TNMAC 294 SC, Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. Pondicherry v. Anbu Thiagarajan and Anr., 2009 2 TN MAC 364 and Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co.Ltd. v. V.Chandran and Anr., 2010 (1) TN MAC 65.