LI Network
Published on: January 23, 2024 at 12:50 IST
In a recent judgment, the Karnataka High Court has ruled that when it is not established that the deceased driver involved in a road accident possessed a valid driving license, the Claims Tribunal should apply the “pay and recover” principle.
The Court directed the insurance company to deposit the compensation amount, with the intention to recover it later from the vehicle owner.
Justice T.G. Shivashankare Gowda, presiding over a single-judge bench, partially allowed the appeal filed by the New India Assurance Company Limited.
The judgment modified the award previously issued by the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation in Chitradurga District.
The case involved the death of a lorry driver named Ghouse, employed by S.M. Nooruddin. Ghouse died in a road accident when the lorry he was driving capsized. His legal representatives sought compensation under Section 22 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, a claim that was opposed by the insurance company.
The insurance company argued that there was no evidence of a valid driving license held by the deceased at the accident site.
The absence of the license indicated that the owner had allowed someone to drive the vehicle without a valid license, violating the terms and conditions of the insurance policy.
The claimants contended that the burden of proving the non-possession of a valid driving license rested with the insurance company.
The Court acknowledged the employer-employee relationship and upheld the entitlement of the petitioners to claim compensation as dependents under Section 22 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act. While affirming the Tribunal’s findings on the compensation amount, the court revisited the issue of liability on the insurance company.
Noting the lack of evidence regarding the deceased holding a valid driving license, and with no allegations of negligence or failure to verify the license, the court applied the “pay and recovery” principle.
The Court allowed the appeal in part and directed the insurance company to deposit the compensation, intending to recover it from the lorry owner.
The case was argued by Advocate B.C. Seetharama Rao for the appellant and Advocate K. Shashikanth Prasad for the respondents.
Case Title: The New India Assurance Company Limited AND Sadika & Others