National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Haleema Begum & Ors.
2012 Latest Caselaw 4230 Del

$~11

*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                       Date of decision:17th July, 2012
+       MAC APP. No.452/2010

        NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.     ..... Appellant
                     Through: Mr.Pankaj Seth, Advocate

                       Versus


        HALEEMA BEGUM & ORS.                       ..... Respondents
                    Through: None.


        CORAM:
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

                            JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The Appellant National Insurance Co. Ltd. impugns a judgment dated 06.01.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby a compensation of `3,63,200/- was awarded for the death of Mohd. Mohsin who is

alleged to have died in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 24.10.2006.

2. In the Claim Petition it was averred that the motorcycle No.DL-

8SAH-3830 which was involved in the accident was being

driven by the Third Respondent (Faheemuddin) at the time of the accident. The police, however, filed a closure report on the ground that the deceased was driving the motorcycle. The Claims Tribunal before proceeding to award a compensation under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988(the Act) was required to give a finding as to who was driving the motorcycle involved in the accident at the time of the accident. It is well-settled (Ningamma & Anr. v. United India Insurance Company Limited, (2009) 13 SCC 710 and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Rajni Devi & Ors., (2008) 5 SCC 736) that borrower of a vehicle steps into the shows of the owner and would not be entitled to compensation.

3. In the circumstances, the impugned judgment is set aside and the case is remanded back to the Trial Court with a direction to give a finding as to who was driving the vehicle at the time of accident and then proceed to determine compensation in accordance with the law.

4. Parties are directed to appear before the Trial Court on 17.08.2012.

5. The award amount was deposited with the Registrar General of this Court in pursuance of the order dated 15.09.2010. It is stated by the learned counsel for the Appellant that the award amount has not been withdrawn by the Claimants. Since the impugned award has been set aside, the amount of

compensation deposited shall be refunded to the Appellant Insurance Company.

6. The statutory amount of `25,000/- shall be refunded to the Appellant Insurance Company through counsel.

7. Pending Applications stand disposed of.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE JULY 17, 2012 pst