THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. v. PARMESHWAR AND 2 OTHERS
FAFO/1367/2015 · 2025-05-22
Saral Srivastava
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 13101 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 13101 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88244 Court No. - 2 Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1367 of 2015 Appellant :- The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Respondent :- Parmeshwar And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Arun Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- ,Deep Chand Singh,Manvendra Narain Pathak Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant- insurance company challenging the award dated 31.01.2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.7, Deoria (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in M.A.C.P. No.117 of 2010 whereby the Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,50,346/- along with 7% interest as compensation to the claimant/respondent no.1.
3. Challenging the aforesaid award, learned counsel for the appellant has contended that once Tribunal has recorded a finding that offending vehicle i.e. Bus No.U.P-52-F-3407 was driven by its driver not holding a valid driving licence, Tribunal should have absolved the insurance company to pay any compensation. It is contended that direction of the Tribunal that insurance company shall pay the award and thereafter, recover it from the owner is illegal and not sustainable in law.
4. Be that as it may, the law on the point that if the owner has committed breach of insurance policy, the insurance company is liable to pay award and thereafter, recover it from the owner, is settled by the judgement of Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Swaran Singh & Others, AIR 2004 SC 1531 wherein Apex Court has held that in case of breach of terms and conditions of policy, the insurance company should pay the award and thereafter recover it from the owner of the vehicle.
5. In such view of the fact, the contention of leaned counsel for the appellant is misconceived and is hereby rejected.
6. Consequently, appeal lacks merit and is accordingly, dismissed with no order as to costs. Order Date :- 23.5.2025 SSharma Digitally signed by :- SUNIL KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad