Electrical Engineering Agencies and anr. Vs. New India Assurance Company Limited and anr. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/388761
SubjectMotor Vehicles
CourtKarnataka High Court
Decided OnNov-17-2005
Case NumberMiscellaneous First Appeal No. 7325 of 2003
JudgeK. Sreedhar Rao, J.
Reported inIII(2006)ACC391; 2006ACJ1957
AppellantElectrical Engineering Agencies and anr.
RespondentNew India Assurance Company Limited and anr.
Appellant AdvocateK. Krishna Kumar, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateR. Jaiprakash, Adv. for Respondent 1
DispositionAppeal dismissed
Excerpt:
- sections 8 & 23 (as amended by act 39/2005): [chidananda ullal & h.n. nagamohan das, jj] succession, opened earlier to the amended act 39/2005 applicability of amended provisions to such cases held, the provisions of the amended act 39/2005 is not applicable to cases where succession had opened earlier to amended act 39/2005 coming into force. on facts held, the succession having opened in the year 1969, evidently, the provisions of amendment act, 2005 would have no application to the facts of the case. further, it is not in dispute that k died in the year 1969. on the demise of k in 1969, the succession is opened. as per the hindu succession act in force in 1969 a coparcener is entitled for coparcenary property. in the year 1969 k and his son deceased defendant no.4- d are the.....k. sreedhar rao, j.1. the petitioner in m.v.c. no. 2805 of 1998 sustained personal injuries in the motor vehicle accident. the tribunal awarded compensation of rs. 72,000/- with interest at 8% p.a., from the date of petition till payment. the tribunal directed the owner of the motor-cycle to pay the compensation. the claim against the insurer is dismissed on the ground that the driver had no driving licence but the driver holding only the learner's licence. the owner and rider of the motor-cycle are in appeal seeking avoidance of the liability and fastening the liability on the insurer. 2. the facts disclose that the owner and rider of the vehicle have participated in the proceedings before the tribunal. it is not established by the rider and a owner that the learner's licence conditions.....
Judgment:

K. Sreedhar Rao, J.

1. The petitioner in M.V.C. No. 2805 of 1998 sustained personal injuries in the motor vehicle accident. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 72,000/- with interest at 8% p.a., from the date of petition till payment. The Tribunal directed the owner of the motor-cycle to pay the compensation. The claim against the insurer is dismissed on the ground that the driver had no driving licence but the driver holding only the learner's licence. The owner and rider of the motor-cycle are in appeal seeking avoidance of the liability and fastening the liability on the insurer.

2. The facts disclose that the owner and rider of the vehicle have participated in the proceedings before the Tribunal. It is not established by the rider and a owner that the learner's licence conditions were duly complied while getting the vehicle. There is no evidence to show that the instructor was accompanying the rider. Therefore, the owner and driver cannot avoid liability. The rule of 'pay and recover' can only be invoked by the victim petitioner. The insured cannot invoke the rule since ultimately there is a liability on him to reimburse the insured. Therefore, the decision of the Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Swaran Singh and Ors. : AIR2004SC1531 , has no application to the facts of the case.

3. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The amount in deposit to be transferred to the Tribunal for payment.