H.S.BEDI, J. - (1.) THIS Bunch of four appeals arise out of the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani dated 5.12.1995, whereby certain amounts have been awarded by way of compensation on account of the accident involving jeep bearing No. DL-IC-B-7127, being driven by its driver Rambir, respondent No. 1. The appeals have been filed only by the owner of the vehicle.
(2.) MR . I.S. Balhara, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has placed his argument primarily on issue Nos. 3 and 8 (which and inter-connected) and dealt with the question as to whether Rambir, the driver of the vehicle, who appeared as RW-1, was holding a valid driving licence on the day of the accident. It has been argued by Mr. Balhara that from a bare perusal of the ocular evidence on record, it was clear that a valid driving licence had been issued to Rambir by the District Transport Officer, Una (H.P.) which had subsequently been renewed from Loharu in the State of Haryana and as such, the appellant was under the bonafide belief that Rambir did hold a valid driving licence and had given him employment on that basis. As against this, Mr. Sangwan, the learned counsel appearing for the claimants has argued that it was clear from the application and report thereon (Exh. R-5) that licence No. R-4872-Una (H.P.)/1986 in Rambir's name had not been issued by the Licensing Authority, Una and in this view of the matter, it was clear that the licence was a fake one. Mr. Balhara has, however, urged that the aforesaid application and report had not been proved on record as the Tribunal in its award had not even referred to the aforesaid documents. To my mind, this argument is without merit for the reason that the application as also the various orders made thereon have been jointly exhibited as Exh. R-5.
(3.) AS would be evident, the primary grievance of the appellant is that as Rambir was holding a valid driving licence, the owner was not liable for the payment of the compensation as that liability was to be fastened upon the Insurance Company with which the vehicle had been insured. There is no merit in this plea.;