ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. PARO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only contention pressed before us is that the driver of the truck would be only liable for the compensation. The insurance company specifically took the plea that the driver did not have a valid driving licence. He neither appeared in the witness box nor tendered or produced his driving licence on record. The claimants too did not produce any evidence of the driver's having a valid driving licence. Learned counsel for the appellant further argued that Court has erred in not inferring by raising presumption in the facts and circumstances that the driver was not holding a valid driving licence at the time of accident. The learned counsel for the appellant relied on M/s New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Surinder Paul and Ors., (1990-1)97 P.L.R. 318.

(2.) The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal framed an issue to the effect "Whether respondent No. 1 was not holding a valid driving licence?" and found after relying on the ratio of Supreme Court's judgment in Narcinva V. Kamat and Anr. v. Alfredo Antonio Dee Martins and Ors., 1985 ACJ 397 that as the insurance company failed to lead any evidence in support of the issue, resultantly the same is decided against the Company.

(3.) In Surinder Paul's case (supra), Single Bench of this Court observed, after noticing the fact that the alleged driver of the tractor trolley was not having right arm and was not capable of driving the tractor, that the denial of Gurmukh Singh is not convincing. It was further noticed that the driver himself appeared in the witness box and considered himself incapable of driving the tractor but still he did so. In view, of the facts noticed, while determining the question whether the insurance Company could be held liable when the driver did not possess a driving licence, the Court observed that since the insurance company specifically pleaded that the driver was not authorised to drive the vehicle as he had no driving licence, it was for the driver to produce the licence. It relied on Shri Kashiram Yadav and Anr. v. Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co., A.I.R. 1989 Supreme Court 2002: