Full Judgment
Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 13.10.2009 passed in MCOP No.56 of 2008 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Ramanathapuram.
JUDGMENT
1. When the vehicle involved in the accident had been plying without permit, whether the insurance company is liable to pay the compensation to the claimants is the issue raised in this appeal.
2. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the liability to pay the compensation.
3. The Tribunal, while rendering the judgment in MCOP No.56 of 2008, directed the fifth respondent herein and the appellant insurance company to pay a compensation of Rs.5,81,000/- (with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition), to the legal representatives of the deceased Karunamoorthy.
4. The deceased was aged 32 years working as a carpenter in United Arab Emirates earning a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month. He died in an accident that took place on 10.08.2007.
5. The claim made by the legal representatives of the deceased was resisted by the Insurance Company on the contention that the vehicle did not have a valid permit on the date of accident. The date of accident is 10.08.2007. The date of registration of the vehicle is 12.07.2007. The permit had been issued on 28.02.2008.
6. According to the Rules, the permit could be obtained within a period of three months from the date of registration of the vehicle. Evidence of an officer from the R.T.O. Office has been recorded, wherein he has stated that even though the vehicle has been registered on 12.07.2007, the permit had been obtained only on 28.02.2008, i.e., which is not within a period of three months. Therefore, no permit had been obtained within a period of three months. Therefore, it is a case where the vehicle was driven without permit.
7. Now the issue to be decided is, when the vehicle had been plying without permit, what is the liability of the Insurance Company.
8. Learned counsel for the claimants relied upon a decision of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, reported in 1995 ACJ 86 (United India Insurance Co.Ltd. v. Shekamma and others), whereunder it has been held that the Insurance Company is liable. That was the case where the vehicle had been plying on temporary permit. Therefore, that decision will not be applicable to the facts of the present case.
9. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in III (2004) ACC 292 (SC) (National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Challa Bharathamma & Ors.). That was the case where, when the vehicle had no permit, the Insurance Company was directed to pay the amount to the claimant with liberty to recover the same from the insured. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that, considering the beneficial object of the Act, it would be proper for the insurer to satisfy the award, though in law it has no liability. Considering the legal proposition enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is proper that the Insurance Company has to pay the amount with liberty to recover the same from the insured, in the present case.
10. In the result, the direction of the Tribunal to the fifth respondent herein and the appellant-Insurance Company to pay the compensation of Rs.5,81,000/- with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition, is modified by directing the appellant-Insurance Company alone to pay the amount, with liberty to recover the same from the insured.
11. The Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit being made, the claimants / respondents 1, 3 and 4 are permitted to withdraw their share of compensation, as per the proportion indicated in the order of the Tribunal. The share payable to the minor claimant/second respondent shall be kept in a bank deposit till the minor attains majority and the mother of the minor/first respondent herein, will be entitled to receive the interest once in three months directly from the Bank and utilise it for the welfare of the minor.
12. With the above modification, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. Consequently, M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2012 is closed. No costs.