NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. IMRANA KHATOON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the National Insurance Company Ltd. against the Judgment/Award dated 16.4.2008 passed by the learned District Judge-cum-Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal, Seraikella in connection with Compensation Case No. 22 of 2006, whereby the learned Tribunal has directed the appellant Insurance Company to pay Rs. 5,21,500/- as compensation to the claimants/R-1 to R-6. Out of the said total compensation amount, Rs. 50,000/- was paid by way of interim compensation and therefore, balance compensation amount of Rs. 4,71,500/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of institution of the application was directed to be paid to the claimants. The brief facts behind the institution of claim application was that the deceased alongwith two other persons had proceeded on motorcycle from Bihar Sponge Iron Limited, Chandil towards, Jamshedpur. When the deceased reached near Bhadudih village, vehicle bearing registration No. NL-01D-1458 came from behind being driving rashly and negligently and dashed the motorcycle, as a result the deceased sustained injuries and died at the spot.

(2.) It is submitted by the appellant that it was a case of contributory negligence and the claimants have not made the owner and insurer of said motorcycle as a party to the claim petition. Furthermore the owner of offending vehicle bearing registration No. NL-01D-1458 has not produced valid driving license of the driver, namely, Jay Kumar Mahto. The driving license produced by Jay Kumar Mahto was not genuine and it was not issued from the office of District Transport Office, Hazaribagh which came on record after verification by the Investigator of the Insurance Company. The learned Tribunal has wrongly fastened the entire liability on the appellant Insurance Company which is incorrect. Since the owner and driver of the offending vehicle have not proved that the driver was having valid license- to drive the vehicle, right to recover the compensation amount should have been given to the appellant Insurance Company. The learned Tribunal has not decided this issue as to whether the driver of offending vehicle was having valid license or not and the report submitted by the Investigator was not properly considered.

(3.) After service of notice respondents No. 1 to 6/claimants have appeared but R-7 Jitendra Prasad Dhrivedi, R-8 Jay Kumar Mahto, driver of the vehicle have not appeared even after substituted service of notice published in the local newspaper.