Partly allowed

The National Insurance Company Limited v. Smt. Lajwanti and Ors.

Rajasthan HC2 Dec 2023CMA/577/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal arising from a Motor Accident Case award, the Rajasthan High Court allowed the appeal in part. The Court held that while the license was fake, the vehicle owner failed to plead that he handed over the vehicle based on belief in its genuineness. Consequently, the Tribunal's finding of sole liability on the Insurance Company was set aside, directing the Company to pay

What did the court decide?

The Tribunal's finding of sole liability on the Insurance Company is set aside. The Company is to deposit compensation and recover it from the vehicle owner on the strength of this award.

The National Insurance Company Limited Vs Smt. Lajwanti and Ors. — Insurance | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:41787]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 577/2002

¶4

The National Insurance Company Limited, through its legally constituted authority, Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Residency Road, Jodhpur

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Smt. Lajwanti W/o Late Shri Amar Chand

¶8

Miss Jyoti D/o Late Shri Amar Chand (Minor)

¶9

Kumbha Ram S/o Late Shri Amar Chand (Minor) Both minors are represented through their natural guardian mother Smt. Lajwanti.

¶10

Hardutt Ram S/o Shri Kanshi Ram

¶11

Narayni Devi W/o Shri Hardutt Ram

¶12

All by caste Swami, residents of village Parlika, Tehsil Nohar, District Hanumangarh

¶13

----Claimants

¶14

Shri Narendra Singh S/o Shri Singhara Singh, by caste Majabi Sikh, resident of Kharal Khurd, P.S. Tada, District Hushiyarpur (Punjab)

¶15

Avtar Singh S/o Shri Harbans Singh, by caste Majabi Sikh, R/o Barayan, P.O. Basti, District Jallandhar (Punjab).

¶16

----Non Applicant No.1 & 2

¶17

For Appellant(s)	: Mr. Jagdish Vyas
For Respondents	: Mr. I. R. Choudhary with
No.1 to 5	Ms. Ashu Devi
	Mr. Adbul Kadir

¶18

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN

¶19

Judgment

¶20

02/12/2023

¶21

The challenge in the present appeal is to the award dated 06.04.2002 passed by Judge, M.A.C.T., Nohar, on the file of MAC Case No.11/1997, wherein and whereby the claim of the respondents herein, the legal heirs of the deceased, was allowed

[2023:RJ-JD:41787]

[CMA-577/2002]

(2 of 4)

and a compensation of Rs.3,52,000 was awarded and ordered the appellant-Insurance Company and the owner of the vehicle the aforesaid compensation jointly and severally.

¶26

The present appeal is filed by the Insurance Company. The main grievance of the Insurance Company is that the evidence produced by the Insurance Company clearly demonstrates that the license produced by the claimants under Exhibit-7 was proved to be a fake license. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the evidence of NAW-1 and NAW-2 under Exhibit A-1 and A-2 clearly demonstrates that Exhibit-7 was found to be a fake one. According to him, there is no appearance from the owner and driver of the vehicle and no pleadings were placed on record claiming that the vehicle was being handed over believing the fake license to be a genuine one. In such a circumstance only, liability can be fixed on the Insurance Company. In absence of such claim from the owner, the Insurance Company cannot be allowed to incur the liability.

¶27

The learned counsel appearing for the respondent-claimants opposed the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant. According to him the Tribunal was right in holding that the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation, and such a finding cannot be disturbed.

¶28

The evidence under Exhibit-7 shows that the license was allegedly issued from UNA Transport Authority, Himachal Pradesh and such a license recovered from the possession of the driver who had done the accident. The evidence of NAW-2 and Exhibits A-2 and A-3 clearly show that the license which allegedly produced under Exhibit-7 was not issued from the office of UNA Transport

[2023:RJ-JD:41787]

[CMA-577/2002]

(3 of 4)

Authority, Himachal Pradesh, and the Tribunal did not believe the evidence of NAW-2 on the ground that he is not a licensing officer but he is only clerk from the office.

¶33

The Tribunal ignored the fact that Exhibits A-2 and A-3 are certified copies obtained from the public office. They are public documents and they can be evaluated even in the absence of examination of NAW-2. The person who disputes the genuineness of such the document has to be lead the evidence to disbelieve such the document. In spite of that, the Insurance Company has examined the clerk of the issuing Authority to prove the documents Exhibits A-2 and A-3, which evidence is sufficient. The evidence placed on the record clearly demonstrates that the license under Exhibit-7 is a fake license. The owner of the vehicle can defend his exoneration if he pleads he handed over the vehicle to the driver believing that the license produced by him was to be genuine one. Such a pleading is lacking in the present case. In fact, no appearance was made by the owner before the Tribunal as well as before this Court. Such benefit is not available to the owner. However, in the present case, the deceased was third party and is unconcerned with the breach of terms and conditions inbetween the owner of the vehicle and the Insurance Company. The claimants interest is protected by the Statute. Therefore, Insurance Company is to comply the award and recover the said amount of compensation on the strength of this award.

¶34

In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. The findings of the Tribunal fastening the liability on the Insurance Company alone is set aside. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire amount of compensation, if not deposited, and recover

¶35

(4 of 4) [CMA-577/2002]

¶36

[2023:RJ-JD:41787]

¶37

the same from the owner of the vehicle. The principle amount and interest, if any deposited, shall be recovered by the Insurance Company on the strength of this award.

¶38

(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J

¶39

3-mSingh/-

The National Insurance Company Limited v. Smt. Lajwanti and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The National Insurance Company Limited v. Smt. Lajwanti and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shanta Devi Vs R.S.R.T.C.

Rajan and Ors. Vs Prahalad Singh

Madan Singh and Ors. Vs Babu Giri and Ors.

Smt.Patasi Vs Jaswant Singh

Deepar Ram and Anr. Vs Narayan Singh and Anr.

Khetaram Vs State