The Jharkhand High Court has re-iterated that the burden of proof lies upon the owner of the offending vehicle that it was being driven by its driver with a valid and effective driving license.

The Court was considering an appeal against the award passed by Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal whereby the Tribunal had directed the appellant-Insurance Company to pay the compensation amount of Rs.6,63,000/- to the claimants with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till the realization of the amount of compensation.

The single-bench of Justice Subhash Chand observed, "Though it is alleged that accident was caused on account of some mechanical defect; yet the driver has not produced himself to depose before the learned Tribunal this very fact that the accident was caused due to the mechanical defect. The very burden of proof lies upon the owner of the offending vehicle even if the said vehicle was insured by the Insurance Company that it was being driven by its driver with a valid and effective driving license. If the initial burden is discharged by the owner, then the liability shifts upon only the Insurance Company."

The Appellant was represented by Advocate Alok Lal while the Respondent was represented by Advocate Prakash Chandra.

The facts of the case are that the deceased, a mason by profession was going to Jammu from his house for work by Tempo which was driven by its driver rashly and negligently, who turned turtle and the deceased had fallen from the Tempo and received injuries and succumbed to the injuries at the spot. The deceased after his death, left the claimants as legal heirs. Consequently, a case came to be registered and compensation was claimed.

The National Insurance Company has Limited, the written statement was filed, in which, it has been stated that the offending vehicle is alleged to have been insured by the National Insurance Company Limited but the owner and driver of the same did not adduce valid document such as driving license, permit etc., there being the breach of the policy, therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable for the same.

Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the direct liability has been fastened to the appellant-Insurance Company to pay the amount of compensation while on behalf of the owner and driver none of them was examined nor any documentary as well as oral evidence was adduced. It was further argued that the initial burden was upon the owner to prove that the offending vehicle was driven with the valid and effective driving license but this very burden of proof has been wrongly shifted by the learned Trial Court upon the Insurance Company and directed to pay the amount of compensation.

The Court at the outset observed that no driving license or other documents related to the Tempo has been filed on behalf of the claimants and the owner and driver of the vehicle neither adduced himself in evidence to depose the pleadings of the written statement and no documentary evidence has been filed in regard to the document of the vehicle such as driving license of the driver of offending vehicle.

The Court ruled that initial burden to prove the validity of the driver's license rests on the owner of the offending vehicle and only if that is discharged, the same shifts to the Insurance Company.

Cause Title: National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Shaibun Nisha

Click here to read/ download Order:







Jharkhand High CourtJustice Subhash Chand

Sheetal Joon