UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. GEETA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the appellant and respondents -claimants finally as a short law point is involved in this appeal.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that a claim petition was filed by claimants due to the death of Buddharam in accident. The Tribunal while deciding issue No. 3 held that the appellant insurance company is not liable for the payment because of the fact that conditions of policy of the insurance was violated by the non -applicant No. 2, Mangla Ram, who was the holder of the policy, but at the same time, the Tribunal directed that the insurance company shall make the payment of the amount of the award and the appellant insurance company shall be entitled to recover this amount from the non -applicant No. 2, Mangla Ram. According to the learned Counsel for appellant, when the Tribunal held that insurance company is not liable for the payment and as there is a clear violation of the terms of the policy then the Tribunal has committed a serious illegality in directing the appellant company to make payment of the award amount to the claimants. The other part of the award is not under challenge.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the respondents submitted that the respondents -claimants are third party and lawful beneficiaries of the contract between the appellant insurance company and the owner of the vehicle. The respondent is not concerned with the minute inter se conditions of the insurance company. The respondents -claimants are having valuable right to enforce award against the insurance company, also as the Motor Vehicles Act provides the provision for recovery of the amount from the insurance company under the circumstances given in the Motor Vehicles Act. Therefore, if the Tribunal has passed the award in favour of claimants wherein the Tribunal directed appellant to make payment of the award amount to the claimants with liberty to the appellant to recover the amount from the owner of the vehicle then the Tribunal has not committed any illegality because here in this case there is an admitted case of contract between the insurance company and the owner of the vehicle. The breach, if there was any, was committed by the owner of the vehicle and for which the insurance company can recover the amount paid to the claimants but cannot deny the benefit to the claimants. Learned Counsel for the respondents relied upon the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Kamla 2001 ACJ 843 (SC), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court directed the appellant insurance company to pay award amount to the claimants and also directed the Tribunal to decide the next question whether the insurance company is entitled to recover that amount from the owner of the vehicle on account of vehicle being driven by a person who did not have a valid licence to drive the vehicle.