IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O. No. 871 of 2009 Date of Decision : February 13, 2009 United India Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant Versus Rajdeep Vasishth and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate for the appellant. T.P.S. MANN, J. On account of death of Satish Kumar in a road accident, his wife, minor son, mother and father filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the grant of compensation of Rs. 15 lakh. Vide award dated 4.9.2008, learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Hoshiarpur, awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 7,51,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum againt Ashwani Kumar, owner-cum-driver of Tata Safari and United India Insurance Company Limited, insurer of the Tata Safari, jointly and severally. The entire amount was ordered to be paid firstly by the Insurane Company. However, the Insurance Company was given liberty to recover the said amount from the owner of Tata Safari. The award has been impugned F.A.O. No. 871 of 2009 -2- by the Insurance Company by filing the present appeal under Section 173 of the Act. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that Ashwani Kumar, driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid driving licence and, therefore, the Insurance Company could not be directed to pay the entire amount of compensation in the first instance. Instead, Ashwani Kumar, owner-cum-driver of the offending vehicle ought to have been burdened with the liability to pay the entire amount of compensation. It has come in the evidence that Ashwani Kumar was not holding a valid and effective driving licence on the date of accident, i.e. on 11.6.2004. Even according to Ashwani Kumar himself, who appeared as RW1, licence, Ex. R4, was valid upto 18.5.2003 and, thereafter, he had not got it renewed from the concerned licensing authority. In such a situation, the Insurance Company could not be saddled with liability to pay the amount of compensation. At the same time, the interest of the claimants have to be taken into consideration so that they are able to receive the compensation awarded to them. As the vehicle in question had been insured with the appellant-Insurance Company, the Tribunal rightly directed that the entire amount of compensation shall be paid by the Insurance Company in the first instance. However, as Ashwani Kumar, driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid driving licence at the time of accident, the F.A.O. No. 871 of 2009 -3- Insurance Company was given liberty to recover the entire amount of compensation paid by it from Ashwani Kumar, who was owner and driver of the offending vehicle. No other point has been urged by learned counsel for the appellant. After going through the impugned award, I am of the view that no case is made out for the grant of any interference in the same, in so far as imposing of the liability on the appellant-Insurance Company to pay the entire amount of compensation in the first instance and, thereafter, to recover the same from Ashwani Kumar, owner-cum-driver of the offending vehicle. Resultantly, the appeal is without any merit and, therefore, dismissed. ( T.P.S. MANN ) February 13, 2009 JUDGE satish