The Jharkhand High Court has clarified the burden of proof regarding liability in road accident claims, observing that the owner of the offending vehicle must prove that the vehicle was being driven with a valid and effective driving license.

Justice Subhash Chand, presided over the case and noted, “The very burden of proof lies with the owner of the incriminated vehicle even if the said vehicle was assured by the insurance company that it was driven by its driver holding a valid and effective driving license. If the initial charge is paid by the owner, the liability lies solely with the insurance company.

The above decision forms part of a miscellaneous appeal filed by the National Insurance Company Limited, challenging an award made by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal, whereby the Tribunal had ordered the insurance company to pay compensation of ₹6,63,000 to the claimants, along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim until its realization.

The claim related to an accident in which the decedent, a mason, succumbed to injuries caused by a Tempo turtle rolling over due to reckless and negligent driving. The plaintiffs, legal heirs of the deceased, alleged that the accident was the result of the driver’s fault. An FIR was lodged and the driver was charged by the police.

The owner and driver of the offending Tempo argued that the accident was caused by a mechanical defect and not reckless driving, and argued that the insurance company was liable since the vehicle was insured.

On the other hand, the insurance company argued that the owner and driver of the vehicle did not present valid documents, including a driver’s license and license, since there was a violation of the policy. Therefore, the insurance company was not liable for the same.

The Court, in its judgment, observed that no driving license or any other document related to the Tempo was filed on behalf of the petitioners.

Furthermore, the Court noted that on behalf of the wife and son of the deceased, the owner and driver of the vehicle did not appear in evidence to file the arguments in the written statement and that no documentary evidence was found. was filed regarding the written declaration document. vehicle such as the driving license of the driver of the vehicle in question.

The Court also observed, “the incriminated vehicle was insured by insurance company no. 3 of the opposing party and, according to the oral evidence placed on file and the indictment, it is proven that the said accident was caused by the driver of the vehicle in question. The charge sheet has also been filed against the opposite party No. 3 in the police case registered for rash and negligent driving and death of the deceased with the concerned police station.

“Was the offending vehicle driven by its driver with a valid and effective driving license? Although it is alleged that the accident was caused by a mechanical defect, the driver did not appear to depose before the learned Tribunal this very fact that the accident was caused by a mechanical defect. added the Court.

Referring to the judgments of the Supreme Court in Pappu & Ors. v. Vinod Kumar Lamba & Anr. (2018) 3 SCC 208 and the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the case United India Insurance Company v. Sanjay Kumar ACJ 2013 at 1223, the Court ruled in the present case although the insurance policy was placed on file and the appellant insurance company did not deny this information; but, “the driving license of the driver of the vehicle in question was not presented either in the name of the applicant or in the name of the owner and the driver and this same charge was not paid by the owner due to the fact that it was driven with a valid and effective driving license, the burden of proof cannot be transferred to the insurance company.

Accordingly, the Court allowed the miscellaneous appeal and set aside the impugned award to the extent that it attributed liability to the appellant insurance company.

“The responsibility for payment of the said compensation amount as well as interest shall lie with the owner of the incriminated vehicle,” ordered the Court.

The Court further directed that if any amount of compensation has been paid by the insurance company, the appellant insurance company shall be liable to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle.

Case Title: National Insurance Co. Ltd v Shaibun Nisha and Ors

Citation LL: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 201

Click here to download the judgment