RAJARAM Vs. KASALIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the interim award dated 20.1.2011 passed by MACT, Kukshi in claim case No. 24/2010 whereby the application filed by respondent Nos. l to 6 under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act was allowed and a sum of Rs. 50,000 was awarded on account of No fault liability as interim compensation holding the appellant and respondent No. 7 liable and respondent No. 8 was exonerated, the present appeal has been filed.

(2.) Short facts of the case are that a claim petition was filed by respondent Nos. l to 6 for compensation alleging that in a motor accident which took place on 16.1.2010, Antarsingh died. It was alleged that offending vehicle was being driven by respondent No. 7 at the relevant time rashly and negligently which was owned by the appellant and insured with respondent No. 8. In the application filed under Section 140 of the M.V. Act it was prayed that interim compensation be awarded. The application was contested by the appellant and the respondent No. 8. After holding a preliminary enquiry learned Tribunal allowed the claim petition holding the appellant and the respondent No. 7 liable for compensation and exonerated the respondent No. 8 on the ground that since driver was not possessing the valid driving licence, therefore respondent No. 8 stands exonerated, against which the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) Learned Counsel for appellant submits that impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal is illegal and deserves to be set aside. Learned Counsel submits that it is only photostat copy of the licence which was filed by the respondent Nos. 1 to 6 on the basis of which learned Tribunal found that respondent No. 7 was not possessing the valid driving licence. Learned Tribunal placed reliance on the decisions in the matter of National Insurance Co. v. Anappa Irappa Nesaria, 2008 4 ACC 169 and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Angad Kaul, 2009 2 ACC 313 Learned Counsel submits that all these aspects can be looked into at the time of final adjudication of the case and not at the stage when the application under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act has to be decided. Learned Counsel placed reliance on a decision in the matter of National Insurance Company v. Thaglu Singh,1995 2 ACC 191 wherein Division Bench of this Court has observed that since it was not the plea that vehicle involved in the accident was not insured, therefore the defence available to the Insuance Company under Section 149(2) can be raised at the time of adjudicating claims under No fault liability. It was further held that otherwise it would frustrate the legislative object in introducing the concept of No fault liability.