Full Judgment Text
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
Decided on: 25 August, 2017
+ MAC APPEAL No. 869/2014
AHMAD HUSSAIN ..... Appellant
Through: Ms. Swati Rathi, Adv.
versus
SANTRI DEVI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Suman Bagga & Mr.
Brijesh Bagga, Advs. for R-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. The appellant was the registered owner of motor vehicle
described as Mahindra & Mahindra Champion bearing no. DL 1LN
2230, the negligent driving of which is stated to have resulted in motor
vehicular accident that occurred on 10.12.2010 causing injuries to the
first respondent (claimant) at whose instance the accident claim case
(MACT 149/2011) was instituted. The tribunal, by its judgment dated
07.08.2013, granted compensation. The insurer of the vehicle (third
respondent) while admitting the liability to indemnify had taken the
plea of breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy on the
ground the driver did not hold a valid driving licence. This plea was
accepted and while the insurer was fastened with the initial liability to
pay the compensation, it was granted right to recover the same from
MAC Appeal No. 869/2014 Page 1 of 2
the appellant and from the second respondent, he being the driver,
both having been held to be jointly and severally liable. It is the grant
of recovery rights which are challenged at the hearing on the appeal at
hand.
2. It is noted that the evidence on record proved that the driver did
hold a valid or effective driving licence for a light motor vehicle
(LMV). The registration certificate of the vehicle shows it is a light
goods vehicle (LGV). In similar fact-situation, this Court has rejected
the plea of the insurance company of breach of terms and conditions in
a series of cases (See National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Shama & Ors.
th
MAC Appeal no. 490/2008 decided on 19 July, 2017; New India
Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Subhash Rastogi & Ors. MAC Appeal No.
th
438/2009 decided on 25 July, 2017 and Ram Narain Verma vs.
Rajani & Ors. (Reliance General Ins. Co. Ltd.) MAC Appeal No.
th
478/2017 decided on 27 July, 2017). Following the same view, the
recovery rights granted against the appellant are set aside.
3. The impugned judgment insofar as it granted such recovery
rights against the appellant is set aside.
4. The amount deposited by the appellant including in terms of the
statutory requirements shall be refunded.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
AUGUST 25, 2017
nk
MAC Appeal No. 869/2014 Page 2 of 2