JAGDISH Vs. RAJKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed by the claimants against the award dated 27.1.1998 passed by 1st M.A.C.T., Mandsaur in Claim Case No. 60 of 1995.

(2.) The claimants' case was that on 31.1.95 while going on his Hero-Majestic along with Pannalal as pillion rider, respondent No. 2 came from the opposite direction driving truck No. CH 01 D-5088 belonging to the non-applicant No. 1 and insured with respondent No. 3 in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against his moped, as a result of which he sustained injuries and became permanently disabled. He filed claim case seeking compensation of Rs. 7,40,000. The respondents resisted the claim and inter alia pleaded that respondent No. 2 was not having a valid driving licence, therefore, it was not liable to pay compensation. The learned Tribunal on appreciation of evidence held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the truck by non-applicant No. 2. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 2,18,000 .with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum against non- applicant Nos. 1 and 2 and exonerated the non-applicant No. 3 insurance company holding that at the time of accident non- applicant No. 2 was not holding a valid and effective driving licence. Hence, this appeal by the claimants.

(3.) Mr. Samwatsar, learned counsel for the claimants, submitted his arguments only on the point of exoneration of non- applicant No. 3 of its liability to pay compensation. He submitted that the burden of proving that respondent No. 2 was not having valid driving licence on the date of accident was on the insurer, non-applicant No. 3 and he did not produce any evidence, therefore, the Tribunal committed error in absolving the insurance company. On the other hand, Mr. Sanjay Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents, supported the impugned award.