NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. BANYA GHOSH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereafter the Act), at the instance of an insurer, is directed against the judgment and award dated 15th July, 2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District Judge, 8th Court, Alipore, South 24-Parganas on an application under Section 166 thereof, registered as M.A.C. Case No. 100 of 2009. The tribunal found that the victim, a motor cyclist aged 33 years had suffered multiple injuries in a road accident, ultimately leading to his death. It was further found that the offending vehicle (a Trailer NL-02G-5252), which dashed the victim, was driven rashly and negligently by the driver of the said Trailer (offending vehicle). Since it was also found to be covered by a policy of insurance issued by the appellant herein, which was the opposite party no.2 before it, the tribunal directed the appellant to bear the compensation awarded by it i.e. Rs.6, 62,300/-, together with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till realization, which was to be shared by the (4) claimants as indicated in the impugned judgement/order/award. The claimants were incidentally the widow, minor daughters and mother of the victim.

(2.) The only point raised by Mr. Das, learned advocate for the appellant/insurer is that the tribunal committed grave error in fastening the appellant/insurer with the liability to bear compensation payable to the claimants. According to him, the driver of offending trailer did not have a valid driving license to drive the vehicle as well as he did possess a driving license to drive the same and he contended that the tribunal should have fastened the Respondent/Insured No. 5 herein with the liability to compensate the claimants. It has also been argued that the principles laid down in the decision in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh reported in 2004(3) SCC 297 would not apply here.

(3.) Mr. Das also submits that he filed one application (CAN 4713 of 2015) for additional evidence regarding Driving Licence. Appearing for the claimants/respondents 1 to 4 in the appeal, Mr. Mondal, learned advocate contended that having regard to a decision of recent origin of the Supreme Court in Singh Ram v. Nirmala and Ors., reported in 2018 SAR (Civil) 473, the direction of the tribunal on the appellant/insurer to pay the compensation awarded to the claimants at the first instance does not merit any interference. He has placed the judgment in its entirety to contend that if at all it is found that owner of offending vehicle was primarily responsible for the accident and the driver did not have a valid driving license to drive Trailer, the Court may direct the appellant/insurer to pay the compensation amount to the claimants/respondents 1 to 4 and recover it from Respondent/Insured No. 5 herein.