Gujarat High Court
Reliance General Insurance Company ... vs Ranjanba Gajendrasinh Jadeja on 3 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/180/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 180 of 2022
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
=============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
=============================================
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
Versus
RANJANBA GAJENDRASINH JADEJA & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR CHIRAYU A MEHTA(3256) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS KIRTI S PATHAK(9966) for the Defendant(s) No. 7
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 5,6
RULE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 03/09/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1988") at the instance of the appellant- Insurance Company being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 1.10.2021 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Main), Jamnagar in MACP No.61 of 2015. By the said impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition preferred by the present respondent nos. 1 to 4 - original claimants under Section 166 of the Act, 1988 thereby holding the original respondents jointly and severally liable to pay an amount of compensation of Rs.8,33,000/- less principal amount awarded under Section 140 of the Act, if any paid, with interest at the rate of 9% pa from the date of filing of claim petition till its actual Page 1 of 9 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:11:49 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/180/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2025 undefined realization with proportionate costs. In the process, the Tribunal has while examining the issue of liability refused to consider the defence raised by the appellant- Insurance Company seeking exoneration from their liability to pay an amount of compensation, alternatively direction of pay and recovery. Hence, the present appeal at the instance of the appellant- Insurance Company.
2. Heard Mr. Chirayu Mehta, learned advocate for the appellant- Insurance Company. The Coordinate Bench vide order dated 21.01.2022 noticing the submissions of the learned advocate for the appellant- Insurance Company and the grounds raised in the appeal by prima facie considering by the findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal in light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nirmala Kothari vs. United India Insurance Company Limited reported in (2020) 4 SCC 49, the Court had admitted the appeal. The notice of admission of appeal is reported to have been duly effected upon the respondent nos. 5 and 6, being the owner of the insured vehicle of the appellant Insurance Company and owner of the second vehicle involved, respectively. Despite service of notice of admission upon them, they have chosen not to appear and contest the present appeal. The Insurance Company of the second vehicle
- respondent no.7 has been represented by the learned Ms. Kirti Pathak. The notice of admission on respondent nos. 1 to 4 is reported to have remained unserved, however noticing the limited challenge made by the present appellant - Insurance Company as evident from the grounds raised in the appeal and the submissions made, the appeal is taken up for Page 2 of 9 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:11:49 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/180/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2025 undefined hearing in their absence.
3. Looking to the limited controversy raised by the present appellant- Insurance Company and in absence of any contradictory submissions being made with regard to the issue of negligency and quantum of compensation is concerned, the foundational facts in this regard has remained unchallenged.
4. Learned advocate for the appellant - Insurance Company has at the outset invited my attention to the findings and reasons recorded by the Tribunal while deciding the issue of liability. Referring to the aforesaid findings and the reasons, learned advocate has submitted that the Tribunal committed grave error in seeking further discharge of burden of proof with regard to owner of the vehicle having knowledge about fake driving license of the truck driver. According to the learned advocate, the cogent material has been brought on record by the appellant Insurance Company who have thereby successfully proved before the Tribunal that the driving license produced on record at Exh.64 is a fake document. The attention of this Court was further invited to the communication addressed by the competent authority of the RTA, Ambala produced on record at Exh.65 wherein the said competent authority has refused to acknowledge the fact about issuance of such driving license by their office. On the contrary, it was clarified that stamp which was visible on the copy of the alleged driving license does not relate to RTA, Ambala. On appreciation of the aforesaid evidence, the Tribunal has arrived at a conclusion that the driving license Page 3 of 9 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:11:49 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/180/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2025 undefined produced on record at Exh.64 is a fake document. Learned advocate has further referred to the document produced on record at Exh.60 which is communicated addressed by the Regional Transport Authority, Ambala. The reliance was also placed on the legal notice addressed by the panel advocate of the appellant- Insurance Company on 26.3.2021 to the driver as well as owner of the insured vehicle thereby cautioning them about the fake driving license as well as seeking instructions about the production of any other driving license held by the driver of the insured vehicle at the relevant time of accident. Referring to the Exh.72, learned advocate has pointed out that the aforesaid legal notice has been delivered at the address of the respective respondents i.e. owner as well as driver of the insured vehicle. Learned advocate has therefore, submitted that extreme steps which are otherwise expected from the litigant Insurance Company has been fulfilled. In absence of any response being received from the owner and the driver of the insured vehicle and though having chosen not to appear in the original claim proceedings, the Tribunal ought to have drawn adverse inference against the owner of the vehicle of having committed breach of terms and conditions of the policy. Learned advocate in support of his submissions placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Singh Ram Vs. Nirmala and Ors reported in (2018) 3 SCC 800 as well as unreported decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Reliance General Insurance Company Limited vs. Heenaben Khanjanbhai Vora and Ors rendered in First Appeal No.3577 of 2022 dated 6.12.2024. He has therefore, submitted that the impugned judgment and award passed by Page 4 of 9 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:11:49 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/180/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2025 undefined the Tribunal may be modified to the extent by issuing appropriate directions of pay and recovery against the owner of the insured vehicle - respondent no.5 herein.
5. Learned advocate Ms. Kirti Pathak appearing for the respondent no.7- Insurance Company has supported the aforesaid submissions made by the learned advocate for the appellant- Insurance Company in order to assist this Court on the legal issue involved. She has therefore, urged this Court to pass appropriate order in this regard.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned advocates for the respective parties on record, in light of the findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal and having perused the original record and proceedings, the only limited issue which is raised for consideration of this Court in the present appeal is as to whether the Tribunal committed any error in deciding the issue of liability in the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence brought on record?
7. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by the learned advocate for the appellant- Insurance Company. The issue of "pay and recovery" has been objectively examined and principle of law has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited versus Swaran Singh and others reported in (2004) 3 SCC 297. In para 110 of the said judgment, the Court has given summary of findings on the various issues raised for consideration including the issue Page 5 of 9 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:11:49 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/180/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2025 undefined of fake driving license vis-a-vis breach of policy condition. The Hon'ble Supreme Court after considering the sub-section 2(a)
(ii) of Section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act has held that mere absence of fake or invalid driving license or disqualification of the driver for driving at the relevant time, are not in themselves defences available to the insurer against either the insured or the third parties. The Court has further held that in order to avoid its liability towards insured, the insurer has to prove that the insured was guilty of negligence and has failed to exercise reasonable care in the matter of fulfilling the condition of the policy regarding use of vehicles by duly licensed driver or one who was not disqualified to drive at the relevant time. Having held so, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has also placed heavy burden upon the Insurance Company to not only establish the available defence raised in the said proceedings but also to establish "breach" on the part of the owner of the vehicle. Having held so, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has further left it open to the Court concerned without laying down any further criteria as to in what manner burden would be treated to have been discharged as same would depend upon the facts and circumstance of the each case. Considering the aforesaid ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the ratio laid down in the case of Nirmala Kothari (supra) as well as Singh Ram (supra), the Tribunal had rightly placed burden upon the appellant- Insurance Company to prove their defence seeking exoneration from their liability to pay an amount of compensation by observing that respondent Insurance Company was required to establish that owner of the insured vehicle truck had knowledge about the fake driving license of Page 6 of 9 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:11:49 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/180/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2025 undefined the truck driver. Having recorded so, the Tribunal ought to have considered the further evidence led on record by the appellant - Insurance Company, more particularly, the legal notice issued by the appellant- Insurance Company which is produced on record at Exh.71. It is evident from the record that the aforesaid legal notice was addressed not only to the driver of the insured vehicle but to the owner of the insured vehicle as well. The postal acknowledgment receipts / track record produced on record at Exh.72 indicate that the said legal notice has been duly effected upon the aforesaid parties. Despite service of notice in the original claim proceedings as well as in the present appeal before this Court, the owner of the vehicle for the reasons best known has chosen not to appear and contest the original claim proceedings and present appeal. In such circumstances, the adverse inference can be drawn against the owner of the vehicle of having not taken sufficient care about verifying the existence of any valid and effective driving license in name of driver of insured vehicle before handing over heavy vehicle like truck driven by him. Thus, it can be inferred that because of the absence of any license in favour of the driver of the truck, there was fundamental breach of the terms and conditions of the policy which had in fact contributed to the occurrence of accident.
8. On appreciation of the issue of negligency, considering the findings and reasons assigned by the Tribunal, it is mainly based on appreciation of the document like FIR, charge-sheet and panchnama of place of incident. The Tribunal has arrived at a conclusion that the driver of the insured vehicle - truck was negligent to the extent of 80% towards occurrence of Page 7 of 9 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:11:49 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/180/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2025 undefined accident, it can be inferred that because of the absence of the license to drive heavy vehicle like truck, the same had contributed to the occurrence of the accident. However, at the same time insofar as the original claimants are concerned, absence of driving license at the time of accident, the Insurance Company cannot escape from its liability to pay amount of compensation to the claimant being third parties. In the facts of the case, the Court is therefore, inclined to modify the impugned judgment and award to the extent by issuing appropriate directions of pay and recovery against the owner of the insured vehicle - Truck.
9. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned judgment and award dated 1.10.2021 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Main), Jamnagar in MACP No.61 of 2015 is hereby modified by holding the original respondents jointly and severally to pay amount of compensation of Rs.8,33,000/- less principal amount awarded under Section 140 of the Act, if any paid, with interest at the rate of 9% pa from the date of filing of claim petition till its actual realization with proportionate costs with a further direction that the appellant Insurance Company - original respondent no.2 shall at first instance pay the entire awarded amount of compensation to the original claimants with a further liberty to seek recovery of entire awarded amount from the original respondent no.1- respondent no.5 herein to the extent of their liability as determined by the Tribunal.
9.1. At this stage, learned advocate for the appellant - Insurance Company has drawn my attention to the order Page 8 of 9 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:11:49 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/180/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2025 undefined dated 21.01.2022 passed by this Court in application for stay preferred at the admission stage, it is submitted that pursuant to the aforesaid order the entire award amount with costs and interest has been deposited with the concerned Tribunal and thereafter pursuant to the order dated 22.09.2022 passed by the Coordinate Bench, even in absence of the original claimants having entered their appearance in the present proceedings, 30% of the deposited award amount was directed to be released in favour of the original claimants, which according him, might have been released so far and remaining 70% was directed to be invested in the Fixed Deposits initially for a period of two years, which must have been renewed pending present appeal.
9.2. Noticing the aforesaid interim order passed in the proceedings in view of the disposal of the present appeal, the Tribunal is directed to hereby release the entire award amount in favour of the original claimants within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of present order, subject to due verification, through recognized RTGS / NEFT mode and in terms of the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in this regard.
10. With theses observations, present First Appeal stands disposed of.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J) RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH/sfs/3/9/25 Page 9 of 9 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Thu Sep 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 04 23:11:49 IST 2025