IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL. A.O. NO. 335 of 2005 The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. … Appellant. Vs. Sri Preetam Singh and five others .. Respondents. Mr.M.K. Goel, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. B.M. Pingal, Advocate for the respondents/claimants. None appeared for respondents 5 and 6. Dated: 09-04-2008 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 4.5.2005, passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/III F.T.C. Haridwar, in MACP No. 31/2003. 2- Brief fats of the case are that on 21-2-2003, when the deceased Ompal Singh along with his two other friends was going toward Shankaracharya Chowk and when he reached near bypass near Sahgal Petrol Pump, Truck NO. U.G.A. 9896, in order to overtake another truck, was being driven at a high speed and dashed Ompal Singh, due to which he succumbed to the injuries at the spot. The deceased at the time of accident was 42 years of age and he was earning Rs. 4,500/- per month from shop. 3- The opposite parties driver and owner of the truck filed joint written statement and denied the negligence of truck driver. According to them the deceased was moving in the middle of the road in an inactive state and collided with the truck. 4- The opposite party /Oriental Insurance Company has filed the written statement and alleged that the accident has occurred due to rash and negligence on the part of trucks driver. The driver had no valid driving license, hence the liability is not with the insurer of the truck. 5- The Tribunal on the basis of pleading of parties framed relevant issues in the claim petition. The claimant adduced evidence but the opposite parties did not adduce any evidence in support of their cases. 6- The Tribunal after hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, awarded a sum of Rs. 1,85,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of final payment payable by Oriental Insurance Company. 7- Feeling aggrieved, the Oriental Insurance Company has preferred this appeal before this Court. 8- I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9- The learned counsel for the appellant has confined his argument on the point that the driver of the offending truck was not having valid driving license and that was the reason that the owner has not produced the driving license before the Tribunal, and the Tribunal has committed manifest error in fixing liability against the insurer. 10- After having considered the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company and having perused the material on record, I do not find any force in the submission of the learned counsel. Although the insurance company in its written statement has taken this plea that the truck had no valid documents and its driver was not having a valid driving license, but the insurance company has not adduced convincing and reliable evidence before the learned Tribunal in support of its contention. The insurance company has filed a letter sent by Advocate of the Insurance Company, intimating the Senior Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Company, Divisional Office, Varanasi, that on investigation from the office of R.T.O. Varanasi the D.L. No 12410/ dated 3.10.88, pertaining to the driver Azad Ali was found to be fake as the said D.L. was issued in favour of Lalit Kumar Chowdhary. But the Insurance Company has not produced the concerning official from the office of R.T.O. Varanasi, who might have deposed that the license was not issued in the name of Azad Ali. From the above letter one thing is clear that the Insurance Company has full knowledge about the driving license issued in the name of Azad Ali and it is also not the case of the Insurance Company that the license was fake, rather the contents of the letter show that the driving license was issued to some other person, i.e. Lalit Kumar Chowdhary. In the above circumstances it was the bounden duty of the Insurance Company to have adduced reliable and convincing evidence to prove the above fact. In the above circumstances of the case the Tribunal has also held that the insurance company has failed to prove that the driver was not having valid driving license. The vehicle was having valid registration, fitness and permit and it was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company. Therefore, the learned Tribunal has fixed the liability of compensation upon the insurer. I do not find any ground to interfere with the finding recorded by the learned Tribunal. 11- In view of above discussion, the appeal lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. 12- Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The impugned judgment and award dated 4-5-2005 is confirmed. 13- The amount of compensation deposited by the Insurance Company before this Court at the time of admission of appeal, be remitted to the Tribunal concerned. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) ISB