M/S National Insurance Co.Ltd vs Md.Rafimd.Kaleem And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 3079 Tel

 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVA RAO NAIDU

                  MACMA No.651 of 2018

JUDGMENT :

The appellant herein is the insurance company, which

was shown as second respondent in the claim petition vide

M.V.O.P.No.57 of 2007, before the Principal District Court,

Nizamabad, and the appeal is filed against the award in the

said O.P.

M.V.O.P.No.57 of 2007 has been filed by one Md. Rafi

@ Md. Kaleem seeking compensation on the ground of the

injuries caused to him in a road accident. According to his

claim in the said petition, on 19.08.2005, while the said Rafi

and another person proceeding on a scooter, they met with an

accident, since one motor-cyclist dashed their bike. The

petition filed by said Rafi was partly allowed by the Court

below and a sum of Rs.1,31,600/- was awarded as

compensation. The present appeal is filed on the ground that

the Court below did not consider the plea taken by the SSRN,J

insurance company that the motor-cyclist has no driving

license. They have examined the Branch Manager and

employee from the RTA, Nizamabad, to prove that the said

motor-cyclist has no driving license. However, the Court

below did not consider the claim and passed the award against

the insurance company and owner of the motor-bike, thereby,

the appellant/insurance company sought for setting aside the

award.

The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that

the insurance company is able to examine not only the Branch

Manager but also the Junior Assistant from RTA, Nizamabad,

to establish that the rider of the motor-bike was not possessed

any license, but the Court below erroneously awarded

compensation directing the insurance company to pay the

amount, thereby, prayed for setting aside the award.

The point for consideration in the present appeal is

Whether the award passed against the appellant herein is liable

to be set aside ?

SSRN,J

Even though, number of grounds raised in the appeal,

the focus of the appellant is mainly on the aspect of driving

license of the motor-cyclist. The appellant/insurance company

pleaded that they have adduced evidence through the

employee from RTA, Nizamabad to show that the rider of the

bike was not having license, therefore, it amounts to violation

of the policy conditions and on that ground, they sought for

setting aside the award.

It is true, the insurance company has examined his

Branch Manager as RW.1 and Junior Assistant from RTA,

Nizamabad as RW.2. RW.2 categorically stated that according

to their records, the rider of the bike was not holding driving

license in Nizamabad District. However, it is in the evidence

of the same witness that a person can obtain driving license

from any place by filing address proof. It may be a fact that

the concerned police filed charge sheet against the motor-

cyclist for an offence under Section 181 of Motor Vehicles

Act, on the ground that he has no license, but the contentions SSRN,J

of the charge sheet are not proved. In the light of the evidence

and cross-examination of RW.2, there is a scope for the rider

to obtain license from any other place, thereby, the evidence of

RW.2 cannot concluded that the motor-cyclist has no license.

The Court below considered this aspect and came to a right

conclusion while awarding the compensation amount. Hence,

the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

______________________________ JUSTICE SAMBASIVA RAO NAIDU

27th June, 2022.

PLV