Delhi High Court
Dev Nanden Singh vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. on 13 August, 2012
Author: G.P. Mittal
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 13th August, 2012
+ MAC. APP. 52/2012
DEV NANDEN SINGH ...... Appellant
Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Adv. with
Ms. Suman N. Rawat, Adv.
versus
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS. ...... Respondents
Through Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary, Adv. for R-1.
Mr. Neeraj Kapoor, Adv. for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
JUDGMENT
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
1. This Appeal is directed against a judgment dated 20.10.2011 passed by
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby
while awarding a compensation of `29,31,900/- and making the First
Respondent liable to pay the compensation initially, granted recovery
rights against the Appellant.
2. A short submission raised by the Appellant in the instant Appeal is that
the Second Respondent (Sehaj Ram), the driver of the offending vehicle
No. HR-46A-8927 possessed a valid driving licence to drive it on the date
of the accident which occurred on 24.02.2011. The Claims Tribunal erred
in granting recovery rights against the Appellant.
3. Along with Appeal an Application for additional evidence filed by the
Appellant was allowed. The Appellant examined himself (the Second
Respondent before the Claims Tribunal) as AW-1. He testified as under:-
"... In my affidavit, I have referred to the driving licence bearing
No.V-2080/Ag/88 issued by Transport Authority, Agra, (Uttar
Pradesh). I have brought the original driving licence in Court
today, (photocopy whereof has been placed on record at pages 44
to 47 of the Court file, which is marked as mark „X‟) (Original
seen and returned).
I have also brought the original verification report of the driving
licence issued by Transport Authority, Agra (Uttar Pradesh) which
is marked as mark „AW-1/1‟.
I have also placed on record a copy of application seeking
verification of driving licence mark „X‟ from the Transport
Authority Agra, (Uttar Pradesh), (photocopy whereof has been
placed on record at Page 52 of the Court file) which is marked as
mark „AW-1/2‟.
XXXXX by Sh. Naveen Kumar, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
Nil. Opportunity given.
(P.S.CHAGGAR)
REGISTRAR"
4. AW-1's testimony was not challenged in cross-examination by the First
Respondent nor the genuineness of the driving licence, copy of which
was marked as Mark X, nor the genuineness of the report of Transport
Authority, Agra Ex.AW-1/1 was disputed. The driving licence Mark X
and the report Ex.AW-1/1 would show that the Second Respondent
possessed a driving licence No.V-2080/Ag/88 issued on 17.06.1988 for
HMV + HPV + PSV and the driving licence was valid for the period from
21.02.2009 to 20.02.2012. The offending vehicle in the instant case is
Tata 407 which is covered under the category of HMV.
5. During inquiry before the Claims Tribunal the Second Respondent, driver
of the tempo No.HR-46A-8927 appeared as R1W1 and testified that he
possessed a valid driving licence. He denied the suggestion that the
driving licence was not valid to drive the offending vehicle. At the same
time, he did not produce the driving licence No.V-2080/Ag/88 before the
Claims Tribunal.
6. Since it is proved that the Second Respondent possessed a valid driving
licence on the date of the accident, the impugned order granting recovery
rights to the First Respondent New India Assurance Company Limited
against the Appellant cannot be sustained. The same is accordingly set
aside.
7. Since there was no breach of the terms of the policy, it shall be the
liability of the First Respondent (Insurance Company) to satisfy the
award passed against the Appellant (the owner) and the Second
Respondent (the driver).
8. The statutory deposit of `25,000/- shall be refunded to the Appellant.
9. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.
10. Pending Applications stand disposed of.
(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
AUGUST 13, 2012
vk
