- (1.) The owner of the vehicle Jasbir Singh aggrieved by the award passed by the Tribunal holding him liable to pay the compensation to the claimants has preferred the present appeal.
(2.) The Tribunal having adverted to Ex.R6 and R8 issued by the Regional Transport Officer and Licencing Authority, Motor Vehicles Department, Cuttack informing thereby that the driving licence alleged to have been issued in the name of Ghansham was fake chose to fasten the liability on the driver and owner of the vehicle.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant who is the owner of the vehicle in the background of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court would submit that it is only the insurance company who is liable to verify the genuineness of the driving licence and project a case of violation of the terms and conditions of the policy. It is his further submission that in the instant case the appellant had employed Ghansham for the past 20 long years prior to the accident. There was no record to show that he was handin-glove with the driver and that he deliberately permitted the driver who had a fake licence to ply the vehicle. Therefore, it is his submission that the insurance company which has not discharged its burden of proving the violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy is liable to answer the claim.;