(1.) This appeal is filed by the insurance company being aggrieved of award dtd. 27/08/2002 passed by 8th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur in M.V.C. No.869/2000.
(2.) Same is spirit of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.M. Jaya and others(supra). Therefore, in the opinion of this Court, both these judgments have no application to the facts of the case. Division Bench of this High Court in Pavitra Bai and others Vs. Kantilal and another, 200< SCC Online M.P. 515 has clearly held that it is the responsibility of the insurance company to prove the factum of violation of terms and conditions of the policy. In the present case, record reveals that no such burden was discharged by insurance company by adducing evidence to demonstrate either violation of terms and conditions of the policy. Thus, violation of the policy condition to drive a tractor against the policy could not be proved by insurance company by exhibiting the policy and showing that which provision of policy, condition was violated.
(3.) However, insurance company had examined Shri D.S. Kostha from RTO, Jabalpur who proved that license in favour of driver- Rajendra Singh Rajput who drive a tractor was issued on 17/8/2000 and was valid upto 16/8/201;. Thus, it is evident that on the date of accident, driver was admittedly not having valid driving license. In view of such facts, Tribunal's order to pay and recover against the insurance company cannot be faulted with.