ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. PRIYABALA ROY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) EVEN though the matter is listed for admission/hearing under Order XLI Rule 11 CPC, learned counsel for both the parties submit that the same can be disposed of at this stage, since the main grounds of challenge in this appeal are with regard to the liability of the Insurance Company to pay the awarded amount indemnifying the owner of the vehicle, even if the driver of the vehicle was not having a valid Driving Licence at the time of the accident, which is violative of the terms and conditions of policy and the deceased was travelling in the offending vehicle as a gratuitous passenger as well as the quantum of compensation and rate of interest awarded are on the higher side.

(2.) THIS appeal has been filed by Respondent No. 3/Insurance Company challenging the award dated 14.12.2000 passed by the learned Additional District Judge -cum -MACT, Nawarangpur in Misc. Judicial Case No. 88/2000 (M.J.C. No. 22 of 97 of D.J.), which was filed under Section 166 of the M.V. Act.

(3.) THE respondent Nos. 1 and 2 did not choose to appear and file their written statement and hence were set ex parte. The Respondent No. 3/appellant filed its written statement denying all the allegations, inter alia stating therein that the owner of the vehicle did not inform with regard to the accident, the driver of the vehicle was not having a valid driving licence, accident occurred due to fault of the driver and the deceased was travelling in the Jeep as a gratuitous passenger and hence the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation amount indemnifying the owner of the vehicle, since the owner of the vehicle violated the terms and conditions of the policy.