AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Jitendra Chauhan, J.
CR-378-379-CII-2014
Heard. For the reasons contained in the applications, the same are allowed and the delay of 109 days and 86 days in filing and refilling the appeal is condoned.
FAO-179-2014 (O&M)
The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the learned Tribunal erred in holding the appellant-Insurance Company, liable to indemnify the claimants after granting recovery rights, inasmuch as it has been proved on record that the offender tractor was being driven in contravention of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy.
I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the case file.
It is not disputed that at the time of the accident in question, the offending tractor was being driven in breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy as the tractor was not insured for attaching the water tanker therewith. The respondent-owner and driver of the offending tractor also did not step into the witness box to rebut the above assertions.
However, the Motor Vehicles Act is a beneficial legislation, therefore, for the fault of the owner and driver, the claimants cannot be left to suffer. Therefore, this Court feels that the learned Tribunal is absolutely right in holding that the insurance company shall make the payment to the claimants with a right to recover the same from the owner and the driver. In view of the above, the present appeal being bereft of any merit, is hereby dismissed in limine.