FAO No. 1841 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 1841 of 2011 Date of decision 11.7.2011 Purina Devi ...Appellant v National Insurance Company Ltd. & Others ...Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jitendra Chauha Present: Mr.Rajiv Kumar Trikha,Advocate for the appellant JITENDRA CHAUHAN.J(Oral) C.M.No.5603-CII of 2011 For the reasons mentioned in the application, the delay of 107 days in refilling the appeal is condoned. C.M. stands disposed of. Main case This First Appeal has been filed by the appellant-owner, against the Award dated 13.10.2010, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,Hoshiarpur (for short the Tribunal). Brief facts of the case are that on 2.4.2006 at about 9.a.m. Balwinder Singh (complainant) alongwith Pawan Kumar, Gurbax Ram, Surinder Singh and 7-8 other passengers were going to Hoshiarpur in Mini Bus bearing registration No. PB-08-F-5223, ( for short the offending vehicle) owned by Sri Swami Atam Vidya Madir School, Nathuwal, to attend the conference organised by the B.J.P. at Hoshiarpur. The bus was driven by Driver-Nathu Ram, respondent No.1, at a high speed and in a FAO No. 1841 of 2011 (O&M) 2 rash and negligent manner. It is alleged that at 9.35 a.m when the bus reached in the area of village Maira Jattan, the driver applied brakes all of a sudden, and the bus at once turned towards the right hand side of the road and fell into the adjoining low lying area, due to which Mukesh Kumar received serious injuries. He was taken to Civil Hospital, Hajipur,where he succumbed to his injuries. Other passengers also received injuries. Matter was reported to the police and FIR No. 26 dated 2.4.2006 was registered. The Tribunal after going through the entire evidence produced before it, came to the conclusion that the offending vehicle was being driven by respondent No.1, Nathu Ram, which was in the ownership of Swami Atam Vidiya Mandir School, respondent No.2. The vehicle was insured with National Insurance Company Limited, respondent No.3, as per insurance cover Ex.RY. The Tribunal allowed the claim petition filed by the parents of Mukesh Kumar, deceased and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,25,000/- against respondents No. 1 to 3 jointly and severally. It was further ordered that the entire amount of compensation shall be paid by the Insurance company. However, it was ordered that Insurance Company is at liberty to recover the amount so paid by it to the claimants from the owner of the offending vehicle. Aggrieved against the award of the Tribunal, the owner, respondent No.2 has filed this appeal. The main argument of learned counsel for the appellant is that the Tribunal has wrongly recorded the findings that the insurance company is at liberty to recover the awarded amount from the insured. He further argued that the offending bus bearing registration NO.PB-08-F-5223, belongs to Sri Swami Atam Vidiya Mandir and that the deceased was not a FAO No. 1841 of 2011 (O&M) 3 passenger in the bus. The bus was going to Hoshiarpur, and fell towards the right side of the road due to which Mukesh Kumar, received injuries and later on, he expired. From the perusal of the record, it is clear that Mukesh Kumar sustained serious injuries, when the driver of the offending vehicle applied the brakes all of a sudden, while driving the said vehicle at a high speed in a rash and negligent manner, as a result of which Mukesh Kumar died later on. The National Insurance Company, respondent No.3, took specific stand in the written statement that the offending vehicle involved in the accident was driven by the driver, who was not having any valid driving licence neither the bus had the route permit. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly held that the owner and driver have violated the policy conditions, and therefore,the insurance company is at liberty to recover the awarded amount from the insured, after initial payment to the claimants. It is proved on record that the driver of the offending vehicle was not having a valid driving licence and thus violated the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. As the breach of the insurance policy is proved, no fault can be found with the findings recorded by the Ld. Tribunal. No ground is made out to interfere in the well-reasoned findings recorded by the Tribunal in the Award dated 13.10.2010. Therefore, the present appeal is dismissed. (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE 11.7.2011 MS Note: Whether to be referred to the Reporter? Yes/No.