Mahesh Chandra Sharma, J. - (1.) BOTH these misc. appeals arise out of common award, hence same are being decided by this common judgment. Both the misc. appeals have been filed by the appellant Insurance Company against the award dt. 18.1.2001 passed by the Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sambharlake, District Jaipur (for short the 'learned tribunal')
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that on 12.4.1997 deceased Gopal was going from sambharlake to Habaspura with one Birdaram on his loona moped, when they reached near Habaspura at about 10:00 PM motor -cycle No. RJ -14M -8313 being driven by Tara Chand, came in rash and negligent manner and dashed against Loona Moped, due to which Moped driver Gopal died on the spot and his friend Birdaram sustained simple and grievous injuries. Fir was lodged regarding this incident. Thereafter, claimants -respondents filed claim petitions before the learned Tribunal. Notices were issued. Written statement was filed. Evidence was submitted by both the parties. The issues were framed. Thereafter, the learned Tribunal after hearing both the parties passed the impugned award. Hence, this misc. appeal before this Court.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant Insurance company submits that the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned judgment/award has not considered the facts and circumstances of the case and evidence available on record in right perspective. The learned Tribunal has committed grave error in law by not exonerating the insurance company from its liability because it was a specific condition in the insurance policy that the driver should possess a valid and effective licence at the time of accident and the driver was not having any valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident. The learned Tribunal has committed serious error of law and facts by not considering the fact that as per the charge -sheet Ex. 10, there was a charge against the driver under Sec. 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act for not having any valid and effective driving licence at the time of the accident. The charge -sheet i.e. Ex. 10 is produced by the claimants relying upon it, thus the contents of it are relied upon and admitted by the claimants. It is well established principle of law that the facts admitted need not to be proved. The learned Tribunal has also failed to consider the judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court delivered in the matter of Smt. Kaushnurna Begum & Ors. vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., SB Civil Misc. Appeal No. 6/2001, decided on 3.1.2001. Thus, in the light of the aforesaid judgment, the interest awarded by the Tribunal @ 12% per annum deserves to be reduced @ 9% per annum in the present case but no note of the judgment was taken into consideration by the learned Tribunal The findings of the learned Tribunal are based on surmises and conjectures Hence, the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal be quashed and set aside and the appellant -insurance company be exonerated from its liability.;