High CourtsSingle Bench(2017) 08 RAJ CK 0062

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited vs Rambha Devi And Ors

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 4 August 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Arun Bhansali, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 5127 Of 2011

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 344 words

This appeal is directed against judgment and award dated 22.07.2011 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sirohi ('the Tribunal'), whereby, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,02,800/- as compensation in favour of claimants and though the appellant Insurance Company has been exonerated, has directed for first paying and then recovering the same from the owner.

The Tribunal while deciding the issue pertaining to the liability of the Insurance Company came to the conclusion that as the driver was in possession of driving licence authorized to drive light motor vehicle and the vehicle in question being an Auto, was a transport vehicle and, therefore, there was violation of policy conditions and the Insurance Company was not liable and, consequently, ordered for pay and recover.

The Insurance Company had filed the appeal challenging the direction to pay and recover.

When the appeal came up for admission, it was directed that the amount as ordered by the Tribunal may be deposited in the Tribunal and the amount shall be disbursed to the claimants, upon filing undertaking by the claimants that in the event of passing of adverse order in appeal, the claimants shall refund the said amount.

The issue of requirement of licence for driving a Light Transport Vehicle now stands concluded by Larger Bench judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mukund Dewangan v. Oriental Insurance Company Limited & Ors. : C.A. 5826/2011 decided on 03.07.2017 and, therefore, the finding recorded by the Tribunal for exonerating the Insurance Company and ordering for pay and recover cannot be sustained.

In view thereof, though there is no cross-objection filed by the owner of the vehicle, exercising powers under Order XLI, Rule 33 CPC, the finding recorded by the Tribunal on issue No.3 deserves to be and is set aside.

Consequently, the appeal filed by the appellant Insurance Company is dismissed. It is further ordered that the Insurance Company would be liable for payment of compensation alongwith owner and driver of the vehicle and the direction of the Tribunal pertaining to pay and recover shall stand set aside.