Narendra Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. The claimant-respondent No.1 filed an application before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Baran, for compensation u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, in respect of injuries sustained by him in motor accident which took place on 18.2.1996. The non-claimant No.1, owner and driver of the vehicle, .filed written reply to the claim application. The New India Assurance Company, non-claimant No.2 also filed separate reply to the claim application where a specific objection was taken that the driver of the vehicle was not having a valid and effective driving license. There is a breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy, hence the Insurance Company is not liable to indemnify the liability of the owner of the vehicle. The Tribunal framed four issues. Both the parties led their oral and documentary evidence. The learned Tribunal vide its award dated 23.9.1997 decided the issues in favour of the claimants and against the non-claimants. The issue No.3 relating to violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy, was also decided against the Insurance Company. The Tribunal allowed the total compensation of Rs.1,08,000/- in favour of the claimants with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of claim application i.e. 28.11.1996. Being aggrieved with the same, the New India Assurance Company has preferred this appeal before this court.
(2.) The only contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the learned Tribunal committed an illegality in fastening the liability to pay the amount of compensation on the Insurance company whereas the driver of the vehicle was not holding a valid and effective driving license. He contended that the driving license was issued for the period from 23.8.96 to 22.2.1997, whereas the accident took place on 18.2.1996 much prior before issuance of driving license. He, therefore, contended that the finding of the learned Tribunal in respect of issue No.3 is liable to be set aside and the appellant Company is liable to be exonerated from its liability to pay the compensation.
(3.) No one is present on behalf of the claimant-respondent No.1 despite service of notice. Mr. Ashish Sharma appears on behalf of the respondent No.3, United India Insurance Company Ltd which has already been exonerated from the liability in the case.;