Y.C.GUPTA,J - (1.) THE present Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Order/Award dated 16. 5. 2011 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ghaziabad in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 161 of 2009 filed by the claimant-respondent nos. 1 to 4 on account of the death of Chandan Singh in an accident which took place on 6. 3. 2009 at about 8. 00 P. M. The case set-up in the Claim Petition was that on 6. 3. 2009 at about 8. 00 P. M., the said Chandan Singh was returning to his home from his duty on a Bicycle; and that a Tanker bearing Registration No. UP-13D-5330 (hereinafter also referred to as "the vehicle in question") being driven by its Driver rashly and negligently, hit the Bicycle of the said Chandan Singh from behind on account of which the said Chandan Singh sustained serious injuries and died on the spot.
(2.) THE respondent no. 5 was the owner of the vehicle in question while the Appellant-Insurance Company was the insurer of the vehicle in question. After exchange of the pleadings between the parties, the Tribunal framed Issues in the said Claim Case. Evidence was led in the said Claim Case. Having considered the material on record, the Tribunal recorded its findings on various Issues. The Tribunal, inter-alia, held that the accident in question took place on account of rash and negligent driving by the Driver of the vehicle in question resulting in serious injuries to the said Chandan Singh and his consequent death. The Tribunal further held that there was no contributory negligence on the part of the said Chandan Singh. The Tribunal further held that the Driver of the vehicle in question was not having valid and effective Driving Licence at the time of the accident in question. In view of the above findings, the Tribunal passed the impugned Judgment and Order/Award dated 16. 5. 2011, inter-alia, awarding to the claimant-respondent nos. 1 to 4, compensation amounting to Rs. 4,17,500/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum with effect from the date of presentation of the Claim Petition till the date of final payment. However, in view of the above finding recorded by the Tribunal that the Driver of the vehicle in question was not having valid and effective Driving Licence on the date of the accident in question, the Tribunal directed that the amount of compensation would initially be paid by the Appellant-Insurance Company, and thereafter, the Appellant-Insurance Company would have right to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle in question (respondent no. 5 herein) . We have heard Sri Rahul Sahai, learned counsel for the Appellant-Insurance Company and Shri Nigamendra Shukla, learned counsel for the Caveators/Claimant-Respondent Nos. 1 to 4, and perused the record. Sri Rahul Sahai, learned counsel for the Appellant-Insurance Company submits that having held that the aforesaid vehicle in question was being run against the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy, the Tribunal erred in directing the Appellant-Insurance Company to pay the amount of compensation and thereafter recover the same from the owner of the vehicle in question, i. e., respondent no. 5 herein.
(3.) SRI Rahul Sahai submits that in any case, the interest of the Appellant-Insurance Company as against the owner of the vehicle in question (respondent no. 5 herein) should have been properly secured so that after making the payment of compensation under the impugned award, the Appellant-Insurance Company would be able to recover the same from the owner of the aforesaid vehicle in question. Sri Rahul Sahai has relied upon the following decisions in this regard:-- 1. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sri Nanjappan and Others, 2004(2) TAC 12 (SC) . 2. National Insurance Company Vs. Challa Bharathamma, 2005(1) TAC 4 (SC) . We have considered the submissions made by Shri Rahul Sahai, learned counsel for the Appellant-Insurance Company. As regards the submission made by Sri Rahul Sahai that the Tribunal erred in directing the Insurance company to make the payment of compensation and thereafter recover the same from the owner of the vehicle in question, it is pertinent to refer to the relevant provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Sub-section (5) of Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 lays down as under:-- "147. Requirements of policies and limits of liability--(1) to (4) . . . . . . . . . (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, an insurer issuing a policy of insurance under this section shall be liable to indemnify the person or classes of persons specified in the policy in respect of any liability which the policy purports to cover in the case of that person or those classes of persons. " ;