DAMODAR SINGH Vs. DRAUPADIBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the owner of tractor No. MPH 6453 which was involved in an accident resulting in the death of one Gorelal.

(2.) THE dependants of late Gorelal filed a claim under Section 110a of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gwalior (hereinafter referred to as " the Tribunal"), against the present appellant; the insurance company, and the Central Bank of India, which had financed the appellant in the matter of purchase of this tractor, being Claim Case No. 94 of 1974. The Tribunal, vide its award awarded a compensation of Rs. 8,760 to the claimants against the appellant and respondent No. 5 herein (i. e. , Rahim, who was respondent No. 1 before the Tribunal), only. The Tribunal held that Rahim, respondent No. 5 herein, was driving the tractor at the relevant time; that he (Rahim) was not holding a driving licence; and, therefore, according to the terms of the insurance policy (exhibit D-3), the insurance company was not liable. Hence, the present appeal by the owner of the tractor. The claimants have also filed a cross objection contending that the insurance company should also be held liable for the compensation awarded.

(3.) IT is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that Rahim was a mechanic, who had repaired the tractor and was driving the tractor at the relevant time for taking trial and, therefore, the insurance company was liable, even if Rahim had no driving licence. This argument (hereinafter will be referred to as "contention No. 1" ). Learned counsel for the claimants, while adopting the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant, also argued that there is no proof that Rahim was not holding a driving licence at the relevant time, and the burden to prove this was on the insurance company. This argument (hereinafter will be referred to as "contention No. 2 " ). Thus, there are only two contentions to be decided in this appeal.