- (1.) The present Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Order/Award dated 30.4.2011 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Saharanpur in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 115 of 2010 filed by the claimant-respondent nos. 1, 2,3 and 4 on account of the death of Anil Kumar in an accident which took place on 13.3.2010 at about 11 A.M.
(2.) The case set-up in the Claim Petition was that on 13.3.2010, the said Anil Kumar was going towards Deoband on his Motorcycle; and that at about 11 A.M., the Driver of a Three Wheeler Tempo bearing Registration No. UK 08 TA-0684 (hereinafter also referred to as "the vehicle in question") driving rashly and negligently, hit the Motorcycle of the said Anil Kumar on the side, as a result of which the said Anil Kumar sustained serious injuries and was admitted to a Hospital where he died during treatment. 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 Anil Kumar, and his consequent death. The Tribunal further held that there was no contributory negligence on the part of the Driver of the said Motorcycle i.e. the said Anil Kumar. The Tribunal further held that the Driver of the vehicle in question was having valid and effective Driving Licence at the time of the accident in question.
(3.) The Tribunal further held that the Permit issued in respect of the vehicle in question was valid for plying the vehicle in question within the limits of the State of Uttarakhand but the said Permit did not authorize the plying the vehicle in question on the road on which the accident in question occurred in the District Saharanpur in the State of Uttar Pradesh, and thus the vehicle in question was being driven without valid and effective Permit on the road on which the accident in question occurred in the District Saharanpur in the State of Uttar Pradesh. Therefore, the vehicle in question was being got plied by its owner in violation of the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy. In view of the above findings, the Tribunal passed the impugned Judgment and Order/Award dated 30th April, 2011, inter-alia, awarding to the claimant-respondent nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4, compensation amounting to Rs. 2,92,600/- 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 vehicle in question was being got plied by its owner in violation of the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy, 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 Rajeev Chaddha, learned counsel for the Appellant-Insurance Company, and perused the record. Sri Rajeev Chaddha, 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.;