THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 1620 of 2011 JUDGMENT: The present appeal is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the award dated 17.03.2004 in M.O.P.No.210 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam, whereunder for the injuries said to have been received by the 1st respondent herein a claim was made for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and the Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.40,500/-. According to the case of the claimant on 16.11.2000 at 1.00 p.m. when she was traveling in the auto, due to rash and negligent driving of the auto by its driver, turned turtle and the petitioner received multiple injuries and she spent money for treatment. The 1st respondent, who is the owner of the auto remained ex parte and the 2nd respondent filed a counter disputing the nature of the incident, the nature of the injuries received by the petitioner and also the quantum of liability. It was also further pleaded that the driver of the auto was not holding a valid driving license to drive the auto and, therefore, there is a violation of the conditions of the policy and the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation. After considering the evidence of P.W.1 and also the other material documents, the lower Tribunal held that the petitioner received injuries in the motor accident due to rashness and negligence of the driver of the auto. In fact, there is no serious dispute about that fact. So far as the receiving of the injuries is concerned, the lower Tribunal relied on the evidence of P.W.2 and has taken into consideration the head injury and also the pain and suffering and granted a sum of Rs.40,500/-, which cannot be said to be excessive. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that from the evidence of R.W.1 and also from the contents of the charge sheet Ex.B-3, it is quite clear that the driver of the auto was not having a valid driving license and consequently, the Insurance Company not liable to pay the same. It is not in dispute that so far as the petitioner is concerned, she is a third party. It is not a case where the driver of the auto was not having any license at all. It is a case where the driver of the auto was said to be having some defective license. There is no proof that the owner of the vehicle has entrusted the same knowing that the driver was not having a valid driving license. Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, the decision relied upon by the lower Tribunal in the case of National India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh and others[1], applies squarely to the facts of the case on hand and the Insurance Company cannot avoid the liability. Therefore, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No costs. ________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J 29-07-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No. 1620 of 2011 DATE: 29-07-2011 MR [1] 2004 SCCL.COM 22