Jaspreet Singh,J. - (1.) Heard Sri Tarun Kumar Misra learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Satyendra Srivastava appearing on behalf of claimants-respondents no. 1 to 4 and Sri Umesh Chandra Pandey for the respondent no. 5.
(2.) By means of the present first appeal from order filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, the insurance company assails the award rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court no. 1, Faizabad dated 22.02.2011 whereby the claim petition of the respondents no. 1 to 4 was allowed and a sum of Rs. 3,64,500/- has been awarded alongwith interest @ 6% per annum.
(3.) While assailing the award the primary contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that at the site of the accident, which occurred on 06.06.2009, the driver of the offending vehicle one Ajai Pandey was apprehended. It is Ajai Pandey who was enlarged on bail and was facing criminal trial. Even the claimant witnesses who deposed before the tribunal concerned also indicated that it was Ajai Pandey who was driving the vehicle. However, the tribunal has incorrectly held merely relying upon the statement of the owner that the vehicle was being driven by Ramanand who had a valid and an effective driving licence. Thus, the tribunal has erred in returning a finding in respect of issue nos. 3 and 4 and it was established that the vehicle in question was driven by Ajai Pandey who did not have any licence, consequently, no liability could have been fastened on the insurance company.;