PADAM KUMAR Vs. JAI SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant No. 1, who is the owner and driver of the offending vehicle and the appellant No. 2/cleaner have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the award dated 9.11.2001, passed by the member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shujalpur, in Claim Case No. 16/1999, whereby it exonerated the Insurance Company from its liability, on the ground that the appellant No. 1, who was driving the vehicle at the time of accident, was not having valid driving licence.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that on 20.3.1999, the appellant No. 1, who was the owner of mini bus No. MP-13/C-4435, was driving the said bus. He was carrying the students of Saraswati Shishu Mandir, Shujalpur to their school. The gate of the vehicle was not properly closed by the cleaner. When the bus was in stationary position, due to negligence gate was opened and one boy Jai Shah, aged 5 years fell down from the said bus and received injuries. The claim petition was filed by the parents. It was contested by the appellant owner/driver and cleaner as also by the Insurance Company. After recording the evidence of the parties the Tribunal found that the accident took place from the said mini bus and awarded a compensation of Rs. 18,500/- with 12% interest thereon, from the date of filing of the claim petition till realisation. The Tribunal exonerated the Insurance Company on the ground that appellant Padam Kumar, who is the owner and driver of the said bus was not having valid driving licence on the date of accident. On critically examining the evidence on record the Tribunal found that initially appellant Padam Kumar was having a driving licence to drive only tempo and one month prior to the date of accident he has applied for a licence to drive four wheeler light motor vehicle and for that he had also deposited fees through challan before the RTA, Bhopal and, thereafter, an endorsement was made on the licence (Ex. D/2) by the Licensing Authority on 26.3.1999 i.e. 6 days after the accident. The Tribunal has discarded the said endorsement on the ground that the seal and 'signature of the Licensing Authority are not correctly visible and on that ground found that the driver was not having valid licence and exonerated the Insurance Company. The said finding of exonerating the Insurance Company is under challenge in this appeal.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsels for the parties and perused the record.