Amitav Kumar Gupta, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the award passed by the Additional District Judge, F.T.C.-cum-Motor Vehicle Accident Claims, Tribunal, Koderma, in Claim Case No. 11/2006, whereby appellant Oriental Insurance Company Limited has been directed to pay the awarded amount of Rs. 3,91,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim case. The brief facts of the case is that Ram Prasad Kushwaha @ Ram Parwesh Koiri was hit by truck bearing No. BR-21G-9161. He. succumbed to the multiple injuries suffered by him on account of the said accident.
(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company has submitted that as per para 17 of the impugned judgment, it is evident that the Tribunal has considered Ext.-A and Ext.-B, pertaining to driving licence and recorded a finding that it was valid upto 3.6.2004. That the accident occurred in the year 2006. Therefore, it is amply clear that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have a valid driving licence on the date of accident. It is argued that in such circumstances, the Tribunal has erred in fastening the liability on the insurance company, and failed to appreciate the fact that the driving licence was valid only till 2004 and no steps were taken by the driver or owner of the vehicle for renewal of the licence. It is submitted that the finding of the Tribunal that the appellant-insurance company (opposite party No. 3 in the court below) could not produce any material to show that the owner of the vehicle had full knowledge that the driver (opposite party No. 2) did not have a valid driving licence and permitted him to drive the offending vehicle is perverse and not tenable.
(3.) It is contended that the Tribunal has failed to appreciate that the owner of the vehicle was negligent for not verifying whether the driver of the offending vehicle had a valid driving licence. The Tribunal has committed manifest error in not appreciating the material fact that there was breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy by the owner therefore, the liability should have been fastened on the owner and not the insurer. On the above grounds, learned counsel submitted that the impugned award is fit to be set aside, and the liability to pay the compensation should be fixed upon the owner of the vehicle.;