Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 544 (PNJ)

Anand v. Jai Parkash alias Badal

2003-04-21

HARJIT SINGH BEDI

body2003
ORDER H.S. Bedi, J. (Oral) - This Bunch of four appeals arise out of the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani dated 5.12.1995, whereby certain amounts have been awarded by way of compensation on account of the accident involving jeep bearing No. DL-IC-B-7127, being driven by its driver Rambir, respondent No. 1. The appeals have been filed only by the owner of the vehicle. 2. Mr. I.S. Balhara, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has placed his argument primarily on issue Nos. 3 and 8 (which and inter-connected) and dealt with the question as to whether Rambir, the driver of the vehicle, who appeared as RW-1, was holding a valid driving licence on the day of the accident. It has been argued by Mr. Balhara that from a bare perusal of the ocular evidence on record, it was clear that a valid driving licence had been issued to Rambir by the District Transport Officer, Una (H.P.) which had subsequently been renewed from Loharu in the State of Haryana and as such, the appellant was under the bona fide belief that Rambir did hold a valid driving licence and had given him employment on that basis. 3. As against this, Mr. Sangwan, the learned counsel appearing for the claimants has argued that it was clear from the application and report thereon (Exh. R-5) that licence No. R-4872-Una (H.P.)/1986 in Rambirs name had not been issued by the Licensing Authority, Una and in this view of the matter, it was clear that the licence was a fake one. Mr. Balhara has, however, urged that the aforesaid application and report had not been proved on record as the Tribunal in its award had not even referred to the aforesaid documents. To my mind, this argument is without merit for the reason that the application as also the various orders made thereon have been jointly exhibited as Exh. R-5. 4. As would be evident, the primary grievance of the appellant is that as Rambir was holding a valid driving licence, the owner was not liable for the payment of the compensation as that liability was to be fastened upon the Insurance Company with which the vehicle had been insured. There is no merit in this plea. 5. Mr. R-5. 4. As would be evident, the primary grievance of the appellant is that as Rambir was holding a valid driving licence, the owner was not liable for the payment of the compensation as that liability was to be fastened upon the Insurance Company with which the vehicle had been insured. There is no merit in this plea. 5. Mr. Suri, the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company has, however, argued on the strength of the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Asha Rani & Ors., 2003(1) PLR 1 that as it had come in evidence of some of the claimants that they had paid fare to Rambir, before it met with an accident, the vehicle being used for a commercial purpose, absolved the Insurance Company of its liability to make the payment of the compensation. To my mind, this argument is without merit. There is absolutely no evidence to show that the vehicle in question was being used exclusively for commercial purpose and to my mind, a solitary occasion, on which the driver had mis-used the vehicle without the consent or knowledge of the owner would not change the nature of the user of the vehicle. Asha Ranis case (supra) has no applicability to the facts herein, as it was dealing with a case of passengers travelling in a goods vehicle. I am, therefore, of the opinion that these appeals deserve to be dismissed with a rider that the Insurance Company would be liable to make the payment to the claimants as held by the Honble Supreme Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Kamla Devi, JT 2001(4) SC 236 but would be at liberty to recover the same from the owner and the driver of the vehicle in appropriate proceedings. The compensation shall be deposited by the Insurance Company within a period of three months from today. Dasti. Appeals dismissed.