ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. MONIKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Oriental Insurance Company Limited is in appeal before this court against the award dated 23.5.2011 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short, "the Tribunal"), vide which the claim petition brought by Monika and others under the provisions of section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, "the Act") has been allowed, awarding a sum of Rs. 4,84,700/- as compensation to them on the death of Jai Bhagwan, in a road side accident that took place on 6.4.2007. The insurance company has challenged its liability to satisfy the award or rather indemnify the owner of the vehicle on two grounds. The first submission advanced on its behalf is that Jai Bhagwan (deceased) had been driving the motor vehicle involved in the accident after borrowing the same from the owner and secondly, Jai Bhagwan was not possessing any licence to drive the vehicle and, consequently, the insurer claims that it could not be held liable to satisfy the award. The claim of the petitioners can be briefly put as under :-

(2.) On 6.4.2007, at about 1.15 p.m., Jai Bhagwan was driving scooter No. PB-65-2946 on the road leading to ISBT, Sector 43, Chandigarh. When he was near the wine shop of village Kajheri, an unknown Skoda car came from his back side and struck against the scooter as a result of which Jai Bhagwan suffered multiple injuries. He was immediately taken to PGI, Chandigarh, where he succumbed to those injuries on 7.4.2007. Jai Bhagwan is claimed to be 22 years old at the time of accident. He is said to have been working as labourer with Indian Hobby House, Mohali and was earning Rs. 3,300/- per month. A sum of Rs. 50,000/- is claimed to have been spent on the treatment of the deceased as also his funeral and last rites. Claiming that scooter No. PB-65-2946 was owned at the time of accident by respondent No. 1, Mohinder Pal Kohli and was insured with. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, respondent No. 2 and that the death of Jai Bhagwan had occurred due to an accident arising out of the use of said scooter, a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- is claimed as compensation.

(3.) Respondent No. 1, the owner of the scooter has challenged the maintainability of the petition against him. He has, however, claimed that Jai Bhagwan was duly licensed to drive the vehicle. The other averments of the claimants have been denied and the claim petition is prayed to be dismissed.