Hon'ble S.C. Chaurasia,J.
Heard Sri Ashok Mehrotra learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents.
The present appeal has been preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act against the Tribunal's judgement dated 27.7.2006 raising objection with regard to quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
On 5.12.2006 at about 4.00 pm minor Kumari Taqdira who was going along with father, met with an accident with Truck No. UP 32 T-0912 on Sitapur- Lakhimpur Road. The Tribunal held that accident was occurred because of rash and negligent driving of the truck. In an accident minor suffered grievous injury and her left leg was amputated. The tribunal after providing opportunity of hearing to the parties recorded a finding that the accident occurred because of rash and negligent driving of the truck. The tribunal further held that since the truck driver was having no valid licence burden to pay compensation shall be on the shoulder of owner. Therefore, Insurance company has been directed to deposit the compensation with option of recovery from the owner.
Preliminary objection has been raised by the respondents that no permission was obtained by the appellant from the Tribunal to contest the case. The application moved by the appellant has been kept pending by the appellant without pressing for its adjudication.
Attention has been invited towards finding recorded by the Tribunal that on account of invalid driving licence burden to pay compensation is on the shoulder of owner. It has been provided by the Tribunal that it shall be open to the insurance company/appellant to recover the amount of compensation from its owner.
In view of above, appeal is dismissed with liberty to appellant to recover the dues in question from the owner of the vehicle in accordance to law forthwith. It shall be open to the claimant respondent to withdraw the amount deposited either in this court or before the tribunal. Since, the appellant is not liable to pay the compensation and there is option to recover the same from owner, the question raised by the appellant in the present appeal is kept open for arguments in some other case.
Order Date :- 6.1.2010 Madhu