Delhi High Court
Renu Kalra vs Jameel & Ors (M/S Shri Ram General ... on 28 February, 2020
$~37
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Decided on: 28.02.2020
+ MAC.APP. 114/2020
RENU KALRA ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Ram N. Sharma, Advocate.
versus
JAMEEL & ORS (M/S SHRI RAM GENERAL
INSURANCE CO LTD) ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Arun Yadav, Advocate for R-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
NAJMI WAZIRI, J (Oral)
MAC.APP. 114/2020 & CM APPL. 8114/2020
1. This appeal impugns the award of compensation dated 11.12.2015
passed by the learned MACT in Unique Case ID No. 02402C0022472014,
which granted right of recovery to the insurer against the petitioner-the
registered owner of the vehicle. The vehicle was insured by respondent no.3-
the insurer at the time of the accident and it indemnified the losses.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the accident
happened at a time when the appellant had not yet become the owner of the
vehicle i.e. somebody else was its actual and registered owner.
3. The appellant did not participate in the proceeding after filing her
reply, therefore, she was proceeded ex parte and the award was passed
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed By:KAMLESH
KUMAR
Signing Date:04.03.2020
15:00:38
against her. The appellant contends that she knew no better about the
proceedings because allegedly, her counsel did not keep her informed about
the case. It is argued that she had averred that she had seen the license of
the prospective driver and the copy of the same has been annexed with her
reply to the claim petition.
4. She contends that unless the said Driving License was proven to be
false, the vehicle owner would get the benefit of law settled in United India
Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Lehru & Ors. AIR 2003 SC 1292 and in National
Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Swaran Singh & Ors (2004) 3 SCC 297 i.e. the owner
of the vehicle should have seen the license which ex-facie should have
appeared to be genuine and thereafter tested the skills of the prospective
driver, and having found it of a satisfactory level, to have then employed the
driver.
5. The impugned order has not discussed the genuineness of the driving
license. In the circumstances, grant of right of recovery to the insurer is pre-
mature. The award in this regard, is set aside. The case is remanded to the
learned Tribunal for adjudication on the genuineness and validity of the
Driving License which is annexed at page 75 of this appeal.
6. Since the case pertains to a lis which arose in the year 2013 and eight
years have gone-by, the learned Tribunal is requested to endeavour to
adjudicate the issue preferably within a period of six months from the date
when the case is next listed before it. The learned counsels for the parties
assure the Court that they shall assist the learned Tribunal on every date and
shall not seek any adjournment whatsoever when the case is so listed.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed By:KAMLESH
KUMAR
Signing Date:04.03.2020
15:00:38
7. The parties shall appear before the learned Tribunal on 26.03.2020.
8. The appeal is disposed-off in terms of the above.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J
FEBRUARY 28, 2020
AB
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed By:KAMLESH
KUMAR
Signing Date:04.03.2020
15:00:38
