TMI Blog2004 (1) TMI 703X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to as Insurer) assailing various awards of the Motor Vehicle Claims Tribunal and judgments of the High Courts. In view of the fact that these petitions involve pure questions of law, it is not necessary advert to the individual fact pertaining to each matter. Suffice, however, is to point out that the vehicles insured with the petitioners were involved in accidents resulting in filing of claim applications by the respective legal representatives of the deceased(s) or the injured person(s), as the case may be. Defences raised by the Petitioner Company in the claim petitions purported to be in terms of Section 149(2)(a)(ii) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') were : (a) driving licence produced by the driver or owner of the vehicle was a fake one; (b) driver did not have any licence whatsoever, (c) licence, although was granted to the concerned driver but on expiry there of, the same had not been renewed; (d) licence granted to the drivers being for one class or description of vehicle but the vehicle involved in the accident was of different class or description; and (e) the vehicle in question was driven by a person having a lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (2) No holder of a driving licence or a learner's licence shall permit it to be used by any other person. (3) Nothing in this section shall prevent a licensing authority having the jurisdiction referred to in Sub-section (1) of Section 9 from adding to the classes of vehicles which the driving licence authorises the holder to drive. 7. Restrictions on the granting of learner's licences for certain vehicles, (1) No person shall be granted a learner's licence to drive a transport vehicle unless he has held a driving licence to drive a light motor vehicle for at least one year. (2) No person under the age of eighteen years shall be granted a learner's licence to drive a motor cycle without gear except with the consent in writing of the person having the care of the person desiring the learner's licence.' Section 9 provides for grant of driving licence. '9. Grant of driving licence. --(1) Any person who is not for the time being disqualified for holding or obtaining a driving licence may apply to the licensing authority having jurisdiction in the area - (i) in which he ordinarily resides or carries on business, or (ii) in w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (2) A learner's licence or, as the case may be, driving licence shall also be expressed as entitling the holder to drive a motor vehicle of one or more of the following classes, namely: - (a) motor cycle without gear: (b) motor cycle with gear; (c) invalid carriage; (d) light motor vehicle; (e) transport vehicle; (i) road-roller; (j) motor vehicle of a specified description. Currency of licences to drive motor vehicles. - (1) A learner's licence issued under this Act shall, subject to the other provisions of this Act be effective for a period of six months from the date of issue of the licence. (2) A driving licence issued or renewed under this Act shall. - (a) in the case of a licence to drive a transport vehicle, be effective ibr a period of three years; Provided that in the case of licence to drive a transport vehicle carrying goods of dangerous or hazardous nature he effective for a period of one year and renewal thereof shall be subject to the condition that the driver undergoes one day refresher course of the prescribed syllabus; and (b) in the case of any other licence,- (i) if the person obtaining ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e referred to in Sub-section (3) may be accepted by the licensing authority in respect of an application for the renewal of a driving licence made under this sub-section if it is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by good and sufficient cause from applying within the time specified in Sub-section (3): Provided further that if the application is made more than five years after the driving licence has ceased to be effective the licensing authority may refuse to renew the driving licence unless the applicant, undergoes and passes to its satisfaction the test of competence to drive referred to in Sub-section (3) of Section 9. (5) Where the application for renewal has been rejected, the fee paid shall be refunded to such extent and in such manner as may be prescribed by the Central Government. (6) Where the authority renewing the driving licence is not the authority which issued the driving licence it shall intimate the fact of Renewal to the authority which issued the driving licence. Revocation of driving licence on grounds of disease or disability. -Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing sections, any licensing authority may at any time revoke ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en issued under Sub-section (3) of Section 147 to the person by whom a policy has been effected, so much of the policy as purports to restrict the insurance of the persons insured thereby by reference to any condition other than those in Clause (b) of Sub-section (2) shall, as respects such liabilities as are required to be covered by a policy under Clause (b) of Sub-section (1) of Section 147, be of no effect: Provided that any sum paid by the insurer in or towards the discharge of any liability of any person which is covered by the policy by virtue only of this sub-section shall be recoverable by the insurer from that person. (5) If the amount which an insurer becomes liable under this section to pay in respect of a liability incurred by a person insured by a policy exceeds the amount for which the insurer would apart from the provisions of this section be liable under the policy in respect of that liability, the insurer shall be entitled to recover the excess from that person. (7) No insurer to whom the notice referred to in Sub-section (2) or Sub-section (3) has been given shall be entitled to avoid his liability to any person entitled to the benefit of any such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion shall be paid and in making the award the Claims Tribunal shall specify the amount which shall be paid by the insurer or owner or driver of the vehicle involved in the accident or by all or any of them, as the case may be; Provided that where such application makes a claim for compensation under Section 140 in respect of the death or permanent disablement of any person, such claim and any other claim (whether made in such application or otherwise) for compensation in respect of such death or permanent disablement shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Chapter X. (2) The Claims Tribunal shall arrange to deliver copies of the award to the parties concerned expeditiously and in any case within a period of fifteen days from the date of the award. (3) When an award is made under this section, the person who is required to pay any amount in terms of such award shall, within thirty days of the date of announcing the award by the Claims Tribunal, deposit the entire amount awarded in such manner as the Claims Tribunal may direct Mr. Harish Salve and Mr. M.L. Verma, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the insurer made the following submiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, who are third party claimants on the other hand, submitted: (i) that the Parliament deliberately used two different expressions 'effective licence' in Section 3 and 'duly licensed' in Sub-section (2) of Section 149 of the Act which are suggestive of the fact that a driver once licensed, unless he is disqualified, would continue to be a duly licensed person for the purpose of Chapter XI of the Act. (ii) Thus, once a person has been duly licensed but has not renewed his licence, the same would not come within the purview of Section 149 and thus would not constitute a statutory defence available to the insurer in terms thereof. Only in the event of lapse of five years from the date of expiry of the licence, such statutory defence may be raised. (iii) Once a certificate of insurance is issued in terms of the provisions of the Act, the insurer has a liability to satisfy an award. It has been pointed that a major departure has been made in the 1988 Act insofar as in terms of Section 96(2)(b) of the 1939 Act all the statutory defences were available in terms of Sub-section (3) thereof provided that the policy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Legislation. Chapter XI of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, inter alia, provides for compulsory insurance of vehicles in relation to the matters specified therefore. The provision for compulsory insurance indisputably has been made inter alia with a view to protect the right of a third party. This Court in Sohan Lal Passi (supra) noted: 10. The road accidents in India have touched a new height. In majority of cases because of the rash and negligent driving, innocent persons become victims of such accidents because of which their dependants in many cases are virtually on the streets. In this background, the question of payment of compensation in respect of motor accidents has assumed great importance for public as well as for courts. Traditionally, before the Court directed payment of tort compensation, it had to be established by the claimants that the accident was due to the fault of the person causing injury or damage. Now from different judicial pronouncements, it shall appear that even in western countries fault is being read and assumed as someone's negligence or carelessness. The Indian Parliament, being conscious of the magnitude of the plight of the victims of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es mainly concerned with third party right under the policy. Any condition in the insurance policy, whereby the right of the third party is taken away, would be void. Indisputably such a benefit to a third party was provided under the Statute keeping in view the fact that the conditions in the assured's policy may not be of no or little effect in relation to a claim by a person to whom an assured was under a compulsorily insurable liability. In this context, it is necessary to consider as to what is a third party right. A third party claim arises when a victim of an accident suffers a bodily injury or death as a result thereof or his property is damaged. An accident is not susceptible to a very precise definition. The popular and ordinary sense of the word was 'an unlooked-for mishap or an untoward event which is not expected or designed'. In R. v. Morris (1972) l W.L.R. 228 the Court of Appeal defined the word as an 'unintended occurrence which has an adverse physical result'. The Supreme Court of Canada in Pickford and Black Ltd. v. Candian General Insurance Co. [(1976) 2 Lloyd's Rep. 108], stated the law thus :- The meaning to be attached ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, leaned forward and made a grab at the marbie, and in doing so wrenched his knee. The injury was held by the Court of Appeal to be accidental, on the ground that the assured did not intend to get into such a position that he might wrench his knee. At para 17-13 of the said treatise it is stated : Accident includes negligence It makes no difference that the accident was caused by the negligence of the assured (as opposed to his intentional act). Thus there is an accident where the assured crosses a railway line without exercising due care and is knocked down by an approaching train. In fact one of the commonest causes of accidents is negligence, and an accident policy applies, excepted perils apart, whether the injury is caused by the negligent act of the assured himself or of a third party. A right of the victim of a road accident to claim compensation is a statutory one. He is a victim of an unforeseen situation. He would not ordinarily have a hand in it. The negligence on the part of the victim may, however, be contributory. He has suffered owing to wrongdoing of others. An accident may ruin an entire family. It may take away the only earning member. An acci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For the aforementioned reasons, the provisions contained in Chapter XI of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 must be construed in that light. Sub-section (1) of Section 149, casts a liability upon the insurer to pay to the person entitled to the benefit of the decree as if he were the judgment debtor. Although the said liability is subject to the provision of this section, it prefaces with a non-obstante clause that the insurer may be entitled to avoid or cancel or may have avoided or cancelled the policy. 'Furthermore, the statute raises a legal fiction to the effect that for the said purpose the insurer would be deemed to be judgment debtor in respect of the liability of the insurer. In Halsbury's Laws of England, Fourth Edition Reissue, Volume 25, it is stated: 743. Benefits conferred on third parties by the Rood Traffic Act, 1930. It was against the background of the Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 1930 that the Road Traffic Act 1930 (now replaced by the Road Traffic Act 1988), was passed. It was realised that, unless some alterations were made in the rights to which the third party was by the first-named Act subrogated, those rights would frequentl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he date of the accident, he may be liable for prosecution in terms of Section 141 of the Act but Section 149 pertains, to insurance as regard third party risks. A provision statute which is penal in nature vis-a-vis a provision which is beneficent to a third party must be interpreted differently. It is also well known that the provisions contained in different expressions are ordinarily construed differently. The words 'effective licence' used in Section 3, therefore, in our opinion cannot be imported for Sub-section (2) of Section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act. We must also notice that the words 'duly licensed' used in Sub-section (2) of Section 149 are used in past tense. Thus, a person whose licence is ordinarily renewed in terms of the Motor Vehicles Act and the rules framed thereunder despite the fact that during the interregnum period, namely, when the accident took place and the date of expiry of the licence, he did not have a valid licence, he could during the prescribed period apply for renewal thereof and could obtain the same automatically without undergoing any further test or without having been declared unqualified therefore, Proviso appended ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act but also that the damage he suffered flowed from the breach. Under the Motor Vehicles Act holding of a valid driving licence is one of the conditions of contract of insurance. Driving of a vehicle without a valid licence is an offence. However, the question herein is whether a third party involved in an accident is entitled to the amount of compensation granted by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal although the driver of the vehicle at the relevant time might not have a valid driving licence but would be entitled to recover the same from the owner or driver thereof. It is trite that where the insurers relying upon the provisions of violation of law by the assured takes an exception to pay the assured or a third party, they must prove a wilful violation of the law by the assured. In some cases violation of criminal law particularly, violation of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act may result in absolving the insurers but, the same may not necessarily hold good in the case of a third party. In any event, the exception applies only to acts done intentionally or 'so recklessly as to denote that the assured did not care what the consequences of his act might be' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red) committed a breach of his promise. Not when some mishap occurs by some mischance. When the insured has done everything within his power inasmuch as he has engaged a licensed driver and has placed the vehicle in charge of a licensed driver, with the express or implied mandate to drive it himself, it cannot be said that the insured is guilty of any breach. In B.V. Nagaraju v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. : AIR 1996 SC 2054 , Punchhi, J. speaking for the Division Bench followed Skandia (supra) and read down the exclusionary term of the insurance policy to serve the main purpose thereof, holding : The National Commission went for the strict construction of the exclusion clause. The reasoning that the extra passengers being carried in the goods vehicle could not have contributed, in any manner, to the occurring of the accident, was barely noticed and rejected sans any plausible account; even when the claim confining the damage to the vehicle only was limited in nature. We, thus, are of the view in accord with the Skandia's case AIR 1987 SC 1184 the aforesaid exclusion term of the insurance policy must be read down so as to serve the main purpose of the policy that is i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erms of the policy to the employment of drivers over 21. Certain categories of vehicles may not, by law, be driven by persons under 21, and as the framework of the proposal form was apt to cover an application for insurance of such vehicle, he might reasonably consider that Q.9 was designed to all attention to this tact. If insurers take a different view as to the proposer age of drivers from the view of the law, it is open to them - indeed, I would say incumbent upon them - to make this clear by the insertion, of specific provisions in the policy and not attempt to secure their ends by a side wind. I hold that there was no such alteration in the subject-matter of the insurance as would or could avoid the policy. In the event the terms and conditions of policy arc obscure it is permissible for the purpose of construction of the deed to look to the surrounding circumstances as also the conduct of the parties. In Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sony Cheriyan : AIR 1999 SC 3252 , it has been held : The insurance policy between the insurer and the insured represents a contract between the parties. Since the insurer undertakes to compensate the loss suffered by the insured o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ir own facts stating : Under the circumstances, when the insured had handed 'over the vehicle for being driven by an unlicensed driver, the Insurance Company would get exonerated from its liability to meet the claims of the third party who might have suffered on account of vehicular accident caused by such unlicensed driver. In view of the aforesaid two sets of decisions of this Court, which deal with different fact situations, it cannot be said that the decis4ions rendered by this Court in Skandia Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kokiolaben Chandravadan and the decision of the Bench of three learned Judges in Sohan Lal in any way conflict with the decisions rendered by this Court in the cases of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Mandar Madhav Tambe and Kashiram Yadav v. Oriental Fire General Insurance Co. : AIR 1996 SC 1150 There may be a case where an accident takes place without there being fault on the pan of the driver. In such an event, the question as to whether a driver was holding a valid licence or not would- become redundant. (See Jitendra Kumar v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr. : AIR 2003 SC 4161 ]. Skandia (supra), on the other hand, has been approved by a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the insurer to prove that it comes within an exception. In MacGillivray on Insurance Law it is stated: 25-82 Burden of Proof: Difficulties may arise in connection with the burden of proving that the facts of any particular case fall within this exception. The usual rule is that once the assured has proved that the case comes within the general risk, it is for the insurers to prove that it comes within an exception. It has therefore been suggested in some American decisions that, where the insurers prove only that the assured exposed himself to danger and there is no evidence to show why he did so, they cannot succeed, because they have not proved that this behavior was voluntary or that the danger was unnecessary. Since an extremely heavy burden is imposed on the insurers if they have to prove the state of mind of the assured, it has been suggested in Canadian decisions that the court should presume that the assured acted voluntarily and that, where he does an apparently dangerous and foolish act, such danger was unnecessary, until the contrary is shown. In practical terms, therefore, the onus does in fact lie on the claimant to explain the conduct of the assured where th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... )and (5) of Section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 may be considered as the liability of the Insurer to satisfy the decree at the first instance. A beneficent statute, as is well known, must receive a liberal interpretation [See Bangalore Water Supply Sewerage Board etc. v. A. Rajappa and Ors. etc. : (1978)ILLJ349SC , Steel Authority of India Ltd. and Ors. v. National Union Waterfront Workers and Ors., ITI Ltd. v. Siemens Punjab Communications Network Ltd. : [2002]3SCR1122 , Amrit Bhikaji Kale and Ors. v. Kashinath Janardhan Trade and Anr. : [1983]3SCR237 and Kunal Singh v. Union of India and Anr. : (2003)IILLJ735SC . The liability of the insurer is a statutory one. The liability of the insurer to satisfy the decree passed in favour of a third party is also statutory. In Haisbury's Laws of England, Fourth Edition Reissue, Volume 25, it is stated: 749. Judgments required to be satisfied. The first condition of the obligation of the insurers to pay on a judgment is that there is a judgment. The Second condition is that the judgment must be in respect of a liability which is required to be covered by compulsory insurance. In other words, the only person w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecover the amount from the insured, it would have to be seen by referring to section 149(4) successfully recovered from the insured. Section 149(4) says that where a certificate of insurance is issued, so much of the said policy as purports to restrict the insurance of the persons insured thereby by referring to any of the conditions mentioned and it is precisely enacted in regard thereto and that the liability covered by Section 2(b) as are required to be covered by the policy would not be available. The position is made further clear by the provisions enacting that any sum paid by the insurer in or towards the discharge, of any liability of any person who is covered by the policy by virtue of this sub-section shall be recoverable by the insurer from that person. In other words, section 149(4) considers the right of the insurance company in regard to re-imbursement of the amount paid by them only in the context of a situation other than the one contemplated under Section 149(2)(b). It would mean that except under the situation provided by Section 149(2)(b) the insurer would not be in a position to avoid the liability because he has got rights against the owner under the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red might be a man of straw and the insurer might not be able to recover anything from him. But the answer to that is that it is the insurer's bad luck. In such circumstances the injured person also would not have been able to recover the damages suffered by him from the assured the person causing the injuries... Similar view has been taken in Skandia's case (supra), Sohan Lal Passi's case (supra), Kashiram Yadav and Anr. v. Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors. : [1989]3SCR811 and several others. In Kamla's case (supra), a Division Bench of this Court summed up the legal position : The position can be summed up thus : The insurer and the insured are bound by the conditions enumerated in the policy and the insurer is not liable to the insured if there is violation of any policy condition. But the insurer who is made statutorily liable to pay compensation to third parties on account of the certificate of insurance issued shall be entitled to recover from the insured the amount paid to the third parties, if there was any breach of policy conditions on account of the vehicle being driven without a valid driving licence. Learned counsel for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion in Kamla's case (supra) has to be road in the aforementioned context. Sub-section (5) of Section 149 which imposes a liability on the insurer must also be given its full effect. The insurance company may not be liable to satisfy the decree and, therefore, its liability may be zero but it does mean that it did not have initial liability at all Thus, if the insurance company is made liable to pay any amount it can recover the entire amount paid to the third party on behalf of the assured. If this interpretation is not given to the beneficent provisions of the Act having regard to its purport and object, we fail to see a situation where beneficent provisions can be given effect to Sub-section (7) of Section 149 of the Act, to which pointed attention of the Court has been drawn by the learned counsel for the petitioner, which is in negative language may now be noticed. The said provision must be read with Sub-section (1) thereof. The right to avoid liability in terms of Sub-section (2) of Section 149 is restricted as has been discussed hereinbefore. It is one thing to say that the insurance companies are entitled to raise a defence but it is another thing to say that despite ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the driver was not holding a valid licence, it was held the insurance company is liable. The court relied upon the decisions of this Court in Kashiram Yadav's case (supra), Skandia's case (supra) and Sohan Lal Passi's case (supra). WHEN THE: PERSON HAS BEEN GRANTED LICENCE FOR ONE TYPE OF VEHICLE BUT AT THE RELVANT TIME HE WAS DRIVING ANOTHER TYPE OF VECHILE : Section 10 of the Act provides for forms and contents of licences to drive. The licence has to be granted in the prescribed form. Thus, a licence to drive a light motor vehicle would entitle the holder there to drive the vehicle falling within that class or description. Section 3 of the Act casts an obligation on a driver to hold an effective driving licence for the type of vehicle which he intends to drive. Section 10 of the Act enables Central Government to prescribe forms of driving licences for various categories of vehicles mentioned in Sub-section (2) of said section. The various types of vehicles described for which a driver may obtain a licence for one or more of them are (a) Motorcycle without gear, (b) motorcycle with gear, (c) invalid carriage, (d) light motor vehicle, (e) transport vehicl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng conditions taken by the insurer, it would be open to the tribunal to adjudicate the claim and decide inter se liability of insurer and insured; although where such adjudication is likely to entail undue delay in decision of the claim of the victim, the tribunal in its discretion may relegate the insurer to seek its remedy of reimbursement from the insured in the civil court. WHERE THE DRIVER'S LICENCE IS FOUND TO BE FAKE: It may be true as has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that a fake or forged licence is as good as no licence but the question herein, as noticed hereinbefore, is whether the insurer must prove that the owner was guilty of the wilful breach of the conditions of the insurance policy or the contract of insurance. In Lehru's case (supra), the matter has been considered at some details. We are in general agreement with the approach of the Bench but we intend to point out that the observations made therein must be understood to have been made in the light of the requirements of law in terms whereof the insurer is to establish wilful breach on the part of the insured and not for the purpose of its disentitlement from raising any defence or the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isted an exclusion clause in the insurance policy wherein it was made clear that the Insurance Company, in the event of an accident, would be liable only if the vehicle was being driven by a person holding a valid driving licence or a permanent driving licence 'other than a learner's licence'. The question as to whether such a clause would be valid or not did riot arise for consideration before the Bench in the said case. The said decision was rendered in the peculiar fact situation obtaining therein. Therein it was stated that 'a driving licence' as defined in the Act is different from a learner's licence issued under Rule 16 of the Motor Vehicles Rules, 1939 having regard to the factual matrix involved therein. The question which arises for consideration in these petitions did not arise there. Neither the same were argued at the Bar nor the binding precedents were considered. Mandar Madhav Tambe's case (supra), therefore, has no application to the facts of these cases nor create any binding precedent. The view we haw taken is in tune with the judgments rendered by different High Courts consistently. [See for example New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1939. It is also not disputed that the driver of the vehicle did not have driving licence when the accident took place. According to the terms of contract, the Insurance Company has no liability to pay any compensation where an accident takes places by a vehicle driven by a driver without driving licence. In that view of the matter, we do not find any merit in the appeal. The appeal fails and is, accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. In that case, the Court presumably as in the case of Mandar Madhav Tambe's case (supra), was concerned with the terms and conditions of the contract of insurance. Before the Court, no occasion arose to consider the general terms and condition of the contract of insurance vis-a-vis liability of insurance under the Motor Vehicles Act. CONCLUSION: It is, therefore, evident from the discussions made hereinbefore that the liability of the insurance company to satisfy the decree at the first instance and to recover the awarded amount from the owner or driver thereof has been holding the field for a long time. Apart from the reasons stated hereinbefore the doctrine of stare decisis persuades us not to deviate from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tioners herein subject to their right to recover the same from the owners of the vehicles in the manner laid down therein. But this order may not be considered as a precedent. Although in most of the case, we have not issued notices in view of the fact that the question of law has to be determined; we have heard counsel for the parties at length at this stage. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS : The summary of our findings to the various issues as raised in these petitions are as follows: (i) Chapter XI of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 providing compulsory insurance of vehicles against third party risks is a social welfare legislation to extend relief by compensation to victims of accidents caused by use of motor vehicles. The provisions of compulsory insurance coverage of all vehicles are with this paramount object and the provisions of the Act have to be so interpreted as to effectuate the said object. (ii) Insurer is entitled to raise a defence in a claim petition filed under Section 163A or Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 inter alia in terms of Section 149(2)(a)(ii) of the said Act. (iii) The breach of policy condition, e.g. disqualification of driver or invalid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the accidents involving death or of bodily injury or damage to property of third party arising in use of motor vehicle. The said power of the tribunal is not restricted to decide the claims inter se between claimant or claimants on one side and insured, insurer and driver on the other. In the course of adjudicating the claim for compensation and to decide the availability of defence or defences to the insurer, the Tribunal has necessarily the power and jurisdiction to decide disputes inter se between insurer and the insured. The decision rendered on the claims and disputes inter se between the insurer and insured in the course of adjudication of claim for compensation by the claimants and Se 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 adjudication 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 Section 149(2) read with Sub-section (7), as interpreted by this Court above, the Tribunal can direct that the insurer is liable to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
