Bombay High Court
The National Insurance Co. Ltd, Thr Its ... vs Laxmibai Shankar Lashkare And Ors on 29 January, 2024
2024:BHC-AUG:2052
69-FA-1857-2019.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1857 OF 2019
The National Insurance Co. Ltd, Thr Its Authorized
Signatory
....Appellant
VERSUS
Laxmibai Shankar Lashkare And Ors
.....Respondent
.....
Mr. A. B. Kadethankar, Advocate for Appellant
Mr. S. M. Rizwan h/f Mr. T. A. Quadri, Advocate for
Respondents
...
CORAM : R.M. JOSHI, J
DATE : JANUARY 29, 2024
PER COURT :
1. This Appeal is filed under Section 173 of
Motor Vehicles Act against judgment and award dated
30.06.2018 passed in MACP No. 509/2012.
2. Parties are referred to as claimants, insurer
and owner for the sake of convenience.
3. There is not dispute with regard to the fact
that deceased Shankar died in an accident occurred on
07.06.2011. He was riding on motorcycle bearing no MH-
26-J-5397 as a pillion rider. The motorcycle was rode
by Ramchandra. When they reached to the spot of
69-FA-1857-2019.odt
incident truck came from opposite direction gave dash
to the motorcycle. As as result of which, they both
sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the
injuries. Report came to be lodged against driver of
the truck. Deceased was said to be working as teacher
with salary of Rs. 27,145/- per month.
4. Owner though served with summons, failed to
appear before Tribunal. Insurer filed written statement
denying contentions of the claimants. It is
specifically claimed by insurer that the truck bearing
no. PB-10-DE-5830 was not involved in the accident in
question. Objection is also raised with regard to the
driver not having valid and effective license during
the relevant time.
5. Learned Tribunal after recording evidence
accepted the case of the claimants and held Respondent
Nos. 1 and 2 jointly and severally liable for payment
of compensation of Rs. 36,43,720/- with interest @ 7%
pa.
6. Insurer has preferred this Appeal essentially
on two counts i.e., challenging involvement of truck
69-FA-1857-2019.odt
no. PB-10-BF-5830 and the breach of terms of the policy
for want of valid and effective license hold by the
driver of the truck at the relevant time.
7. Learned Counsel for the insurer submits that
the initially FIR was lodged against the driver of
unknown vehicle and later on the involvement of the
truck bearing no. PB-10-BF-5830. It is his submission
that the said vehicle is not isured by the insurer
herein. However, thereafter involvement of offending
vehicle was claimed in the accident in question. Thus,
it is his contention that Tribunal has committed error
in holding involvement of this vehicle in accident. As
far as breach of the conditions of insurance policy is
concerned, he claimed that the driver was not holding
valid and effective license at the relevant time and in
spite of these facts Tribunal has wrongly fasten the
liability of compensation on insurer.
8. Learned Counsel for the claimants supported
the impugned judgment and award.
9. Claimants led oral as well as documentary
evidence. It is the matter of record that the first
69-FA-1857-2019.odt
information report was initially lodged against unknown
truck. Later on, registration number of the said truck
was sought to be given. As rightly observed by learned
Tribunal that there appears error in mentioning
registration number instead of "BE" it is recorded as
'BF'. The findings recorded by the Tribunal are
supported by the police papers, which shows that after
conclusion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been
filed against the driver of the truck insured by the
insurer. Pertinently, insurer has not examined any
witness in order to substantiate its contention. Having
regard to the evidence led by claimants with regard to
occurrence of accident and involvement of vehicle
therein. This Court finds no perversity in the judgment
and award passed by the Tribunal on this point.
10. As far as objection raised by the insurer
about driving license of the driver of the offending
truck is concerned, Exh. 48 i.e., report of the
investigation shows that driver was holding driving
license bearing no. MH-26-20100018095. The said report
indicates that the driver of the truck was holding
valid and effective license at the relevant time. Since
69-FA-1857-2019.odt
the insurer has failed to lead any evidence in
rebuttal, Tribunal was fully justified in rejecting the
contention of insurer about breach of terms of policy
by insured.
11. In view of above discussion, no case is made
out to cause interference in impugned judgment and
award. Resultantly, Appeal stands dismissed. Claimants
are permitted to withdraw amount deposited in this
Court with accrued interest.
12. Pending application, if any, is also disposed
of.
(R. M. JOSHI, J.)
Malani
