Driving Licence Cannot Be Declared Fake on Investigator's Report Alone, Insurer Must Prove It: Rajasthan HC

The Rajasthan High Court has dismissed two appeals filed by National Insurance Company Ltd., holding that an insurance company cannot avoid liability merely by relying on an investigator's report to claim that a driver's licence was fake. The Court said such an allegation must be proved through evidence from the competent licensing authority.

Background of the Case

The appeals arose from two awards passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Sikar, in June 2006. The Tribunal had allowed compensation claims filed by Parmeshwar and the legal heirs of Sultan Singh against Mahavir and the insurer following a motor accident.

Challenging those awards, National Insurance Company argued before the High Court that the driver, Mahavir, did not possess a valid driving licence at the time of the accident. According to the insurer, its investigator had found that the licence, allegedly issued by the District Transport Office (DTO), Guwahati, had not in fact been issued by that authority.

Court's Observation

Justice Ashutosh Kumar noted that the Insurance Company had based its case primarily on the investigator's findings but had failed to summon or examine any official from the licensing authority to establish that the licence was not genuine.

The Court relied on an earlier decision in United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Moda Ram & Ors., observing that a fact cannot be presumed without proper proof.

The bench observed,

"It cannot be presumed that the driving licence issued in favour of the respondent-driver was a fake one as the Insurance Company failed to call the licencing authority to prove or verify the fact that such authority did not issue that licence."

The Court also found that the insurer could not distinguish or dispute the legal principle laid down in the earlier precedent relied upon by the respondents.

Decision

Finding no merit in the insurer's challenge, the Rajasthan High Court dismissed both appeals and left the MACT awards undisturbed.

The Court also disposed of all pending applications.