Burden Of Proof On Vehicle Owner To Establish Driver's Valid License: Jharkhand High Court Sets Aside ₹6.63 Lakh Compensation Award
The Jharkhand High Court has clarified the burden of proof regarding liability in motor vehicle 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 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 above ruling came in a Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the National Insurance Company Limited, challenging an award passed by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal, whereby the Tribunal had directed the Insurance Company to pay a compensation amount of ₹6,63,000 to the claimants, along with interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application until realization.
The claim pertained to an accident in which the deceased, a mason, succumbed to injuries caused by a Tempo turning turtle due to rash and negligent driving. The claimants, legal heirs of the deceased, alleged that the accident resulted from the driver's fault. An FIR was lodged, and the driver was charge-sheeted by the police.
The owner and driver of the offending Tempo argued that the accident occurred due to a mechanical defect, not rash driving, and contended that the Insurance Company was liable as the vehicle was insured.
On the other hand, it was contended by the Insurance Company that the owner and driver of the vehicle did not adduce valid documents including driving license, and permit, there being the breach of the policy, therefore, the Insurance Company was not liable for the same.
The Court, in it's judgement, observed that no driving license or other documents related to the Tempo were filed on behalf of the claimants.
Further, the Court noted that on behalf the wife and son of the deceased, 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 also observed, “the offending vehicle was insured by the opposite party No.3-Insurance Company and from the oral evidence on record and the charge-sheet, it is proved that the said accident was caused by the driver of the offending vehicle. The charge-sheet has also filed against the opposite party No.3 in the police case registered for the rash and negligent driving and the death of the deceased with the police station concerned.”
"Whether the offending vehicle was being driven with a valid and effective driving license by its driver? 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 Court added.
Referring to Supreme Court judgments in Pappu & Ors. v. Vinod Kumar Lamba & Anr. (2018) 3 SCC 208 and the Allahabad High Court judgment in United India Insurance Company v. Sanjay Kumar ACJ 2013 at 1223, the Court held in the present case though the Insurance Policy was on record and the same was not denied by the appellant-Insurance Company; but, “the driving license of the driver of offending vehicle was neither adduced on behalf of the claimant nor on behalf of the owner and driver and this very burden being not discharged by the owner that it was driven with a valid and effective driving license, the burden of proof cannot be shifted upon the Insurance Company.”
Accordingly, the Court allowed the Miscellaneous Appeal and set aside the impugned award up to the extent of fastening liability upon the appellant-Insurance Company.
“The liability to pay the said amount of compensation along with interest will be of the owner of the offending vehicle,” the Court directed.
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 vs Shaibun Nisha and Ors
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 201