NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY Vs. BALU GANBA DORAGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this first appeal the insurer viz. New India Assurance Company challenges the award dated 6-4-1992 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Pune against them.

(2.) MR. A. K. Chaphekar, learned Counsel for the appellants insurer assailed the award passed by the Tribunal only on one ground namely, that the insurer-appellant was not liable under the policy of insurance since the driver of the autorickshaw which was insured with the insurer-appellant held no driving licence to drive the said vehicle.

(3.) THE brief facts of the case are as under : the respondent No. 1 herein is the original claimant and he filed claim application before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pune praying for compensation in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- from the opponents viz. Shri Janardan S. Waichal (respondent No. 2 herein-original opponent No. 1), New India Assurance Company (appellant herein-original opponent No. 2 ). Mrs. Seeta Babaji Bhondekar (respondent No. 3 herein-original opponent No. 3), National Insurance Company Ltd. (respondent No. 4 herein-original opponent No. 4), Hona Namdeo Tidke (respondent No. 5 herein-original opponent No. 5) and Sambhaji Baburao Bhondekar (respondent No. 6 herein-original opponent No. 6 ). The claimant averred in the claim application that on 12-9-1988 at about 5 p. m. he was pillion rider on scooter bearing registration No. MVT/5239. His friend the opponent No. 6 was driving the scooter. When they approached a sharp turn near village Rule, an autorickshaw bearing No. MTA-4550 came in a high and excessive speed and over took the scooter on which claimant was riding on a pillion seat and turned suddenly to its wrong side without giving any signal. Opponent No. 6 was also driving the scooter in a high speed. As a result of dash given by autorickshaw to the scooter, the claimant fell down and suffered fracture of his right knee. The claimant was taken to Khanapur hospital and then to Vadgaon Treemurti Hospital for treatment. The claimant averred that the accident took place because of rash and negligent driving of scooter and the autorickshaw. The claimant claimed compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for the permanent disability suffered by him. The opponents filed separate written statements. The present appellant (opponent No. 2) and insurer of autorickshaw inter alia set up the plea that the driver of the autorickshaw was not having driving licence. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the tribunal framed issues and after recording the evidence held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the two drivers namely the scooter and the autorickshaw and that claimant suffered injuries on account of the said accident. The tribunal awarded the compensation of Rs. 28,000/- inclusive of no fault liability along with interest and apportioned liability to the extent of 80% upon the autorickshaw and the insurer of the autorickshaw and 20% upon the owner of the scooter.