M£*'A.NU.'?74li95
are THE HIGH cou RT or KARNATAKA AT zsameanoms j
DATED '1'!-{IS THE 7m mm or MARCH 33008 ' '- " '
PR ESiS3N'l'
THE HON}-3LEi'm5;.JUS'l'1CE , T
AND '~_ « . 'T
'mm HONBLE MR.JUS'1'lQE ARA}; 'AuARA.,r_; _ " '
M.:+'.A.No.7741/2<2(i;:i%£wc3V. '
1:3BJ'i'WEE.N: ' '
THE BRANCH MANAGER
M/S m~u'1*w INDIA 1NsureAmcr:'T-,._, REGIGQAL £_)l*'F_ICE,' .. ,
BAN<.;ALo;<r;-1' 2, Ai'PELi.AN'i'
(BY SRi.A.r&.VI}3NK;¢;'£'kf§S§}i ' ANv:3_:sx£..;<.R1sHNA1aH, ADVS3
AND: V' % ' A 3 n
_. ,1. RA'/3.133 BEGAN! W '/0. 3:53am sans,
--.ACkE-D ABE)U'339 YEARS
.H0.U_SE_WE.FEV
_ B"0}{KASAGAR VILAGE
1.
-;0sH.~;’1*v(f1′}v,,_s:2LLARY DIST.
‘ 2. R.HaNU,MA:~r:’=’HAkA1Du(a;
L HANUMANTHA RAYA
– S/O R.vENKATAswAMY,
., ESCJKKASAGAR VILLAGE
= _r:<)s£%.1«:'1' ('13, BELLARY L)£S'i'. RESPONDts3N'l'S
.._ (BY $m.v.LAxsaM1KAN'1'H REDDY, ADV. FOR R—1)
, 'i'H1S Ai'PEAL 18 FILED U/S. 30 (1) OF THE WC AC1',
"AGAINSF THE JUDGMENT AND QRDER DATED 27.4.2005
MFA.ND.7'M1I'U5
fact, the learned Advocate for the appeflant–1ns1_ufen.ee.,_
company, called upon. the ownepinsured to .
driving license of the deceased the dd
RC Book. The Commissioner, except
examination of R.W.~iz/Adm£i;ie#;ratie’s1 Qffiice-fi.A..’:.deV
damage the ease of the diebuesed
anything about the Qf valid driving
license held by burden has
to be for decision
has a.1%” Para 105 of the
judgxnei-Wait in the case of National
Singh and others
_ in T1531 is the complete answer to
the iqfuejsiien, which reads as under:
_ 1 The summary of our findings to the
” .__”VdvariQLis’:-.Vieeues as raised in these petitions are as
f<;l'i'ewe:''
" ti) Chapter x1 of the Motor Vehiciee Act.
1988 providing compuisory insurance
of vehicles against third party risks is
9. social welfare legislation to extend
relief by cempcnsation to victims of
/”
M.FA.N(.}.’?741I05
of fulfilling the condition cf the pqiicyf ‘
regarding use of vehicles duis’ _
licensed driver or :Qne:_-which iwia.s..inot’V»”-.e
disqualified tn _driveiat”–the l”fI’«:l.¢i’le”_’l4?BT.I”3i,” ii i
time. i d .
(iv) “he insurancel”-..:_0arnpanieSl_iI are,
howev6lT§’~V.1Withi l.a_ . d ‘avoid V their
liability iiI’t}t_3iStii nc§t::’only’l:i.§%sLti3blish the
_availahie’ ” ‘ efejneeigi, _ the said
i rn1ist~–a.li~io establish
,of the owner of
…. t;;:¢VV_vgna¢t1¢;’i .l;:fV1V¢V_V,:iburden of proof
” iyould be on them.
i(v)l Jcannot iay dawn any
i to how said burden would
it die;-ehlarged inasmuch as the same
i”WGu’l’d depend upon the facts and
circumstances of each case.
Even where the insurer is able to
ii 2 prove breach on the part of the
insured concerning the policy
condition rmarding holding of a valid
licence by the driver or his
qualification to drive during the
relevant period, the insurer would not
be allowed to avoid its liability
If towards insured unless the said
exercise reasonable care in the Hlafifti’ .. 5 »
Mt*’A.N0.?741f05
said power of the tribunal isi’«._notf.:
restricted todecide the»cl_aim:_si interaiae. _ V
betwwn claimant oi:Aclairmi3i1ts:t[o’nAone’ it
side and insured, ineureij and driver’. it E
on the other,,{*~.,….¢1n the couirse¥._of«..
adjudicafing _V ‘ for
compeni5a_tion:’ in and i toe’ . ._ decide’ the
availability defences to
the insauter, has
‘i’nccessa_ril}; the jiirisdiction
.. inter se between
____ H i.nsurcr’–an’d The decision
= thewclairns and disputes
the insurer and
i’i.;1s”i.:red in the course of adjudication
‘of? claini. for compensation by the
iclairoants and the award made
thereon is enforceable and executable
in the same manner as provided in
section 174 of the Act for enforcement
and execution of the award in favour
of the claimants.
(X) Where on adjudimtion of the claim
under the Act the tribunal arrives at a
conclusion that the insurer has
satisfactorily proved its defence in
accordance with the provisions of
arising in use of motor vehicle. . it
Mb’A.N0.?74lI05
Sections 149(2 read with sub–section V
(7); as interpreted by this Oourtfw ”
above, the Tribunal can direct A d’
the insurer is liable to be I’E’:i!I’.I§l.’l”‘1-‘_B;V(:(1′}”.:VA’t’~.VVt’ ”
by the insured for the’
and other arnountstyhiehe it been Vf
compelled to to “the..thirdj °
under the awerdVu:’tif..the ti’ib__uz1a_l;
detertnination ____of-..v_c!aim the
‘i’r%bun2=:__1_”will be ;¢n{¢;t~:§a.b1c and the
money found to inemfer from
_ti=ze_ insu”i’ed– }~’;ilVl” on a
éeertifieete %i\s’s;’ue§:i .ey”‘the.v7mbuna1 to
same manner
…. of the Act as
A A’ ‘ Vajjfears. 9 “ee _ land revenue. The
‘ e Vee;.–:::f£;:;a;éte–+…ei:: be issued for the
d Iteconteryies arrmrs of land revenue
V , only if”, ae required by sub–section (3)
of”‘Se’c;tion 168 of the Act the insured
fails to deposit the amount awarded
favour of the insurer Within thirty
days from the date of announcement
of the award by the tribune}.
(xi) The provtsions contained in sub-
section (4) with proviso thereunder
the subsection (5) which are
intended to cover specified
MFA.NU.’7′?41l£)5
contingencies mentioned thcrein;””ie
enable the insurer to recover ar£m__§1ntV*-.. %
paid under the c:on.tra~<:.t_of V
on behalf of the iI1S:1:lI'6(§-A:_.=~.«f.c>re
court VVc;aisés.v{%rl:§cr¢§’ rgixaren facts
and <;éir:uri1fsta1uges .£.3V§:lj;1:{fi*1.ii§$;§.ti0n of
' Qairris delay the
"i':hc._ ciaims of the
_ …. _ '?;ri_»(_;t_ir:'1.s'."'._ V' "
afiove said paragraph would
clarify the Lsmatign §é¢.1rd~~’i$osition how izne defence raised
111s.u:rérV “iias to be discharged and When?
‘gxcept referring to the defence of the
ir1m4rrer,V_tfiré?..V_C}>mmissioner does not attach the liability on
insurer to indemnify the owncr on account of tcrms and
5 cgndmons of the poucy.
4. Under thcse circumstances, it is just and proper
to afibrd an opportunity to both the parties to lead further