Insurer must strictly prove absence of valid driving licence to escape liability for motor accident compensation.

The appellant Insurance Company filed an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the award dated 23.12.2019 passed by the 5th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, in Claim Case No. 436/2018

The Tribunal had awarded compensation of ₹9,27,200 to the claimants (Respondents 1 and 2), fastening the liability entirely on the appellant as the insurer of the offending motorcycle

The appellant’s primary contention was that the driver of the offending vehicle lacked a valid and effective driving license at the time of the accident

Procedurally, the appellant examined its Law Officer, who testified that the company had sought license details via the Right to Information (RTI) Act, but the Regional Transport Office (RTO) declined to provide documents due to incomplete information

1. Whether the driver of the offending vehicle possessed a valid and effective driving license at the time of the accident to determine if the insurer could be exonerated from liability?

Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, regarding the maintainability of appeals against tribunal awards

The evidentiary principle that the burden of proof lies upon the insurance company to establish a breach of policy conditions—specifically, the absence of a valid driving license—to successfully plead a "pay and recover" order or total exoneration

The Court analyzed the evidence presented by the Insurance Company to determine if they had discharged their burden of proof.

The Court noted that the appellant's Law Officer, Aleem Ahmad Khan, admitted that the RTO's refusal to provide information was based on "incomplete information" rather than a definitive statement that no license existed

The Court observed that after receiving this RTI response, the Insurance Company failed to take any further "effective steps," such as summoning RTO officials or producing the investigator’s report, to prove the driver’s lack of qualification

Consequently, the Court reasoned that a failure to provide information by the RTO does not equate to proof of a policy breach

Since the appellant failed to establish the factum of the invalid license through cogent evidence, the Court found no reason to interfere with the Tribunal's findings

The High Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the award of ₹9,27,200