Raj Kishore Prasad Jaiswal vs National Insurance Co.Ltd & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 1522 Ori

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                               MACA No.477 of 2007

            Raj Kishore Prasad Jaiswal                ....          Appellants
                                                     Mr.C. Purohit, Advocate

                                         -versus-

            National Insurance Co.Ltd & Ors.       ....       Respondents
                           Mr.S.R.Patnaik, Advocate for Respondent No. 1


                        CORAM:
                        JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
                                       ORDER

17.02.2023 Order No.

12. 1. The matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

2. Heard Mr.Purohit, learned counsel for the Appellant and Mr. Patnaik, learned counsel for the Insurer-Respondent No.1.

3. Present appeal by the owner is directed against impugned judgment dated 20th July, 2006 of Additional District Judge-cum-3rd MACT., Rourkela, in MAC No.376 of 2003, wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.1,64,500/- has been granted along with interest @6% per annum with effect from the date of filing of the claim application on account of death of the deceased in the motor vehicular accident on 8th May, 2003.

4. The Tribunal while directing the insurance company to pay the compensation amount, has granted liberty in it's favour to recover the amount from the owner for breach of policy conditions. As per the findings of the Tribunal, the driver of the

offending vehicle i.e. passenger bus bearing registration No.OR- 16-A-4255 did not have valid driving license on the date of accident.

5. It is submitted on behalf of the owner that the Tribunal without verifying the fact, whether the owner had the conscious knowledge of non-availability of driving license on the part of the driver, had directed for recovery of amount from him.

6. It is seen that present Appellant - Owner did not come to context the claim application despite valid service of notice and he was set Ext-parte in the Tribunal. The order setting him Ext-parte has never been challenged by the present Appellant and he does not dispute valid service of notice on him in the claim application. No explanation is offered for his none appearance before the Tribunal nor anything is stated to satisfy his non- appearance before the Tribunal as unintentional. Therefore, it is not found appropriate on his part to contend before this Appellate Court that Tribunal would have verified the fact of conscious knowledge on the part of the owner to permit the accused driver for driving the offending vehicle.

7. It is seen from the impugned judgment that one Bijaya Lakra has been charge sheeted for commission of offence under Sections 279/304-A of the IPC by police. Since nothing is explained on the part of the owner that, under what circumstances he permitted the offending vehicle to be driven by an unauthorized person, no merit is seen in the contention of the Appellant. As such the appeal is dismissed.

( B.P. Routray) Judge S.Das