RAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. ASHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two appeals arising out of the same award dated 01.10.2011 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridabad. One appeal has been preferred by the insurance company seeking discharge of its liability. The second appeal has been preferred by the owner of the vehicle seeking his discharge and payment of compensation by the insurance company.

(2.) The issue involved is short but before deliberating on the issue raised it is necessary to refer to few facts. Vinod Kumar met with an accident on 03.02.2010 while going from Gurgaon to Faridabad. He was 42 years old and was a commission agent. His monthly income was stated to be Rs.15,000/-. The Tribunal accepted the income that was shown in the ITR for the year 2006-07 and assessed the annual income at Rs.1,62,640/- and after making a cut of 1/4th towards personal expenses calculated the compensation at Rs.17,38,000/-. The insurance company had examined a Clerk of the Licencing Department to prove that the licence was fake. The owner-driver moved an application for additional evidence and produced another driving licence. The Tribunal held that a person could not hold two licences at the same time and it was an offence. It was noted that respondent no.2 owner of the vehicle was the father of respondent no.1 and refused to accept the plea that the father was not aware that the licence of his son was fake. It rejected the second licence and allowed recovery rights to the insurance company.

(3.) The insurance company is aggrieved and the sole argument put forth on their behalf is that a person cannot hold two driving licences and the first licence which was produced at the time of accident was found to be fake, therefore, their liability should be discharged.