KALA ALIAS ASHOK KUMAR Vs. DHARAMPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sonepat (hereinafter called 'the Tribunal'), dated May 4, 1983 whereby a sum of Rs. 9,600/ - with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum has been allowed on account of the death of Loveli, aged about 3Vi years, due to the rash and negligent driving of truck No. MRA 3453, belonging to Dayal Chand, Respondent.

(2.) THE only controversy in this appeal is: whether the insurance company is liable for the payment of the compensation awarded or not.

(3.) THE Learned Counsel for the Appellant contended that the insurance company never took any specific plea in the written statement that the driver of the truck, Kala alias Ashok Kumar, was not holding a valid licence. Apart from that, no such issue was claimed before the Tribunal. Thus, argued the Learned Counsel, in the absence of any specific plea and the issue to that effect, the insurance company could not be absolved of the liability. In support of the contention, the Learned Counsel relied upon the Supreme Court decision in Skandia Insurance Company Ltd. v. Kokilaben Chandramdan : 1987 ACJ 411 (SC). On the other hand, the Learned Counsel for the insurance company submitted that the plea was taken in the written statement and Kala, while appearing in the witness -box as RW 1, admitted that he had no driving licence as he was a conductor. Thus, argued the Learned Counsel, in view of this evidence, it has been rightly held by the Tribunal that as per the terms of the insurance policy, the insurance company was not liable. The liability, if any, was of the owner of the offending truck. In support of the contention, the Learned Counsel relied upon Venkatachalam v. Sundarambal Ammal : 1983 ACJ 513(Mad); Ambujam v. Hindustan Ideal Ins. Company : 1981 ACJ 175(Mad) and Damodar Singh v. Draupadibai : 1984 ACJ 589(MP).