LAWS(MPH)-2009-12-20

ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. PURUSHOTTAM

Decided On December 03, 2009
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD Appellant
V/S
PURUSHOTTAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal has been preferred by the insurer aggrieved by award dated 4-5-2007 passed by MACT, Mandla in Claim Case No. 1/2006. Vide impugned award, the Claims Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 1,52,000/- on account of death of Ku. Ranu.

(2.) INSURER has come up in the appeal to assail it's liability to make the payment of compensation on the ground that driver was not holding the valid and effective driving licence as on the date on which accident took place.

(3.) THE Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Swaran Singh and others, (2004) 3 SCC 297, has laid down thus :? 110. (iii) THE breach of policy condition, e.g., disqualification of the driver or invalid driving licence of the driver, as contained in sub-section (2) (a) (ii) of Section 149, has to be proved to have been committed by the insured for avoiding liability by the insurer. Mere absence, fake or invalid driving licence or disqualification of the driver for driving at the relevant time, are not in themselves defences available to the insurer against either the insured or the third parties. To avoid its liability towards the insured, the insure has to prove that the insured was guilty of negligence and failed to exercise reasonable care in the matter of fulfilling the condition of the policy regarding use of vehicles by a duly licensed driver or one who was not disqualified to drive at the relevant time. 110. (vi) Even where the insurer is able to prove breach on part of the insured concerning the policy condition regarding holding of a valid licence by the driver or his qualification to drive during the relevant period, the insurer would not be allowed to avoid its liability towards the insured unless the said breach or breaches on the condition of driving licence is/are so fundamental as are found to have contributed to the cause of the accident. THE Tribunals in interpreting the policy conditions would apply "the rule of main purpose" and the concept of "fundamental breach" to allow defences available to the insurer under Section 149 (2) of the Act.