NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. Vs. CHAMELI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE only ground upon which this appeal assailing the judgment of the Claims Tribunal has been filed by the insurer is that Rakesh Kumar, respondent No. 4 herein who was driving the scooter at the time of the accident, was not possessed of a valid driving licence.

(2.) THE following issues were framed by the Tribunal for adjudication in this case:

(3.) THE second point which arises for consideration is that the owner of the vehicle involved in the accident, namely Mohan Lal, in his testimony clearly deposed that he had left the vehicle on 16.5.1993 with a mechanic as the vehicle had developed a snag while he was driving it from Nahan to Yamunanagar and apparently while the vehicle was lying with the mechanic, Rakesh Kumar, respondent No. 4 unauthorisedly took it, in any event without his consent and knowledge. To the same effect is the statement of respondent Rakesh Kumar also who appeared as RW-2 in the Tribunal. He has clearly stated that on 10.5.1993, respondent Mohan Lal had kept the vehicle with the mechanic Pawan Kumar and that on 17.5.1993, mechanic Pawan Kumar had told him to drive the vehicle for test driving etc. and it was at that stage that the accident occurred.