YADVENDER SINGH Vs. KIRPA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal, stands instituted, by the owner, and, the driver of the offending vehicle whereuponwhom, the indemnificatory liability, was fastened, vis-a-vis, the compensation amount, comprised, in a sum of Rs.40,800/-, and, whereon stood levied interest at the rate of 9% per annum, and, it was ordered to commence from the date of filing of the petition, till realization thereof.

(2.) The counsels appearing for the contesting parties, do not rear any contest, vis-a-vis, the validity, of, rendition of affirmative findings, upon, issue No.1, appertaining to the relevant mishap, being a sequel of rash and negligent manner, of driving, of, the offending vehicle, by appellant No.2 herein. However, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, has contended (a) that the returning of findings adversarial, to the registered owner, of the offending vehicle, especially, vis-a-vis, the issue. serialized as issue No.4, being grossly shaky, and, infirm. Apparently, the discharging onus, vis-a-vis, issue No.4, was cast, upon, the insurer of the offending vehicle. The registration certificate, appertaining to the offending vehicle, and, embodied in Ex.R-3, pronounces qua it being registered, hence, as a bus. The owner of the offending vehicle also during the course of his testification, has placed, on record a photo copy, of the driving licence, of appellant No.2, driving licence whereof stands embodied, in Mark-X. A perusal of Mark-x, echoes qua appellant No.2 being also authorised to drive, the, offending bus. However, the learned tribunal, for want of cogent proof being adduced, by the owner of the offending vehicle qua Mark-X, being proven to be issued or it generating from the records, held by the motor licencing authority concerned, proceeded to slight, its probative efficacy, (b) and, also obviously jointly saddled, the indemnificatory liability qua the compensation amount, vis-a-vis, the appellants herein, i.e. the registered owner of the offending vehicle, and, the driver of the offending vehicle. The afore legal misstep, is, uncalled for, (c) reiteratedly, as the learned tribunal remained unmindful, vis-a-vis, discharging onus qua issue No.4, rather being cast, upon, the insurer of the offending vehicle, and, when mark-X, is, the photo copy of the driving licence held, as, by the driver of the offending vehicle, (d) and, when it holds the name and, description of appellant No.2, (e) and, also when it holds the name, and, description of the motor licencing authority concerned, wherefrom, it stood issued, (f) thereupon obviously it facilitated, the insurer of the offending vehicle, respondent No.2 herein, to ensure elicitation(s), of, original thereof, from the records, in respect thereto, as, maintained by the motor licencing authority concerned. Significantly, the afore recourse(s) would ensure, hence, making of an assured conclusion, that hence, the discharging onus cast, upon, the insurer of the offending vehicle, vis-a-vis, issue No.4, rather being adequately and satisfactorily discharged, more so, vis-a-vis, the signatures, and, seals borne therein. Contrarily, patent, and, obvious non recoursing thereto by the insurer of the offending vehicle, obviously could not constrain, the learned tribunal, to conclude, (f) qua given upon the driving licence standing marked as Mark-X, hence, the discharging onus, vis-a-vis, issue No.4, standing come to be discharged, by the insurer, of, the offending vehicle. Consequently, want(s) of afore recourses, rather by the counsel for the insurer, constrain this Court, to conclude qua the insurer acquiescing, vis-a-vis, the validity, and, authenticity of Mark-x, even if it is a mere photo copy, of, the original thereof. Consequently, it is held that the driver of the offending vehicle, was, at the relevant time, holding a valid, and, effective driving licence, to, drive the offending vehicle.

(3.) For the foregoing reasons, the instant appeal is allowed, and, the impugned award is modified to the afore extent. Consequently, the indemnificatory liability, vis-a-vis, the compensation amount, is, fastened upon the insurer of the offending vehicle. All pending applications also stand disposed of. Records be sent back forthwith.