Driving Without Renewed License Does Not Mean He Is Not Skilled Driver: Bombay HC Directs ICICI Lombard To Pay Deceased’s Kin
The Bombay High Court while allowing an appeal challenging an impugned order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pune has held that that the deceased’s kith and kin do qualify as aggrieved persons, as any person aggrieved by an award of a Claims Tribunal can file Appeal. Identifying the contractual liability of the insurance company, the bench further directed ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. to pay compensation first and recover it from the owner of the offending vehicle later.
“In my view, admittedly, deceased died due to dash of the driver of the offending truck. At the time of the accident the offending truck was insured with the Insurance Company. There was contractual liability of the Insurance Company to indemnify the compensation. Driving licenses of the driver of the offending vehicle was not renewed at the time of the accident. It doesn’t mean that he was not skilled driver. Moreover, it is settled principle of law that if driver of offending vehicle was not holding effective and valid driving licenses at the time of the accident, Insurance Company has to pay compensation first and recover it from the owner of the offending vehicle”, Justice Shivkumar Dige observed in the April 18 2023 judgment, a copy of which was made available today.
Advocate Niketan Nakhawa appeared for the appellants, and Advocate Rajesh Kanojia appeared for the respondent.
The issue to be adjudicated upon in the matter was whether the Claimants can challenge the order passed by the Tribunal regarding exoneration of Insurance Company.
In the present matter, the deceased Asha Baviskar was riding a bike with Claimant 1 (family member), as the pillion rider, when the offending truck in an alleged attempt to overtake, dashed the motorcycle. Consequently, Asha fell under the left rear wheel of the truck, and succumbed to her injuries.
On approaching the Tribunal, it held that there was a breach of terms and conditions of Insurance Policy as driver of offending vehicle was not holding valid and effective driving licenses on the date of the accident and Insurance Company, therefore it is not liable to indemnify.
The respondent-company while relying on Balu Krishna Chavan v. The Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. and Biju R. & Ors. v. Vivekanandan and Ors. claimed as per Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act that the Claimants cannot be considered as aggrieved party as against the Insurance Company.
The bench while relying on the dictionary meaning of “aggrieved person” and Section 173 of M.V. Act held that the appellants being Claimants have right to file Appeal.
"The Tribunal has not considered this fact and passed the order mechanically. Though owner of offending truck has not challenged the impugned order, it cannot be said that the Claimants can’t challenge it. Hence, I hold that any aggrieved person can file the Appeal", the judgment read.
Accordingly, while allowing the appeal directed the respondent-Insurance Company to pay compensation within six weeks and recover it from the owner of the vehicle later.
Cause Title: Shubhash Waman Baviskar v. Adinath Hambirrao Budhwant