$~51 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010370362026 + MAC.APP. 520/2026, CM APPL. 53255/2026 & CM APPL. 53256/2026 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. .....Appellant Through: Mr. Anshum Jain & Mr. Shiv Bhala, Advs. versus SMT. BABY KUMARI & ORS. .....Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL O R D E R % 12.08.2026 CM APPL.-53257/2026 1. For the reasons stated in the said applications, the same is allowed. 2. The delay of 26 days in re-filing the present appeal is condoned. 3. Application stands disposed of, accordingly. MAC.APP. 520/2026 1. This appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company assailing order dated 07th April 2026 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (‘MACT/Tribunal’), Saket Courts, New Delhi, in MACT No. 306/2023, whereby compensation of Rs 34,79,010/- along with interest @7.5% was awarded, for an accident which occurred on 07th August 2022, when Pappu Choudhary/deceased along with his father were travelling in a vehicle which was involved in a accident with a truck. As a result of the accident, he This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2026 at 11:37:10 sustained injuries and subsequently died. 2. It is contended by Mr. Anshum Jain, counsel for appellant/ Insurance Company, that the victim himself was driving the vehicle and did not have a driving license. Therefore, contributory negligence ought to have been attributed to the deceased. 3. The aforesaid issue was raised before the MACT, wherein it was held that mere absence of a driving licence would not raise the assumption of negligent driving by the offending vehicle. No plea had been raised that there was sudden change of direction or rash driving by the deceased. 4. In any event the law in this regard has been settled including inter- alia in Sudhir Kumar Rana v Surinder Singh and Ors. (2008) 12 SCC 436, wherein a plea of contributory negligence was raised on the ground that the person driving the victim vehicle did not possess a valid driving licence. The Supreme Court clearly held that the absence of a driving licence, by itself, could not lead to a finding of contributory negligence in relation to the accident. It is one thing to say that the claimant was not in possession of a valid driving licence; however, in the absence of any finding of fact that he had driven the vehicle rashly or negligently, contributory negligence could not be attributed to him. 5. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Pending applications are rendered infructuous. 6. Statutory amount, if any deposited, shall be refunded. 7. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court. ANISH DAYAL, J AUGUST 12, 2026/vs/zb This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2026 at 11:37:10