<p> Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka has upheld a Mangaluru court’s decision to fasten sole liability of a road accident on the management board of a school. </p>.<p>Justice K Manmadha Rao ruled that the vehicle owner is responsible for ensuring that the driver holds a valid and effective driving licence (DL).</p>.<p>He affirmed Rs 5.32-lakh compensation payable by the management of Balmi Primary School to the family of school bus driver Badruddin. </p>.<p>The accident occurred on a rainy day on August 14, 2008, when the school bus plunged into the Phalguni River. </p>.<p>The bus was returning from Ulaibettu to Balma English Medium School when the accident occurred around 9 am. Eleven people, including seven children and Badruddin, who was driving the school bus, died in the accident. </p>.<p>Badruddin’s wife and two children approached the Commissioner for Employees’ Compensation seeking Rs 13 lakh as compensation. However, the insurer of the school bus opposed the claim, citing violation of policy conditions and contending that the deceased driver did not possess a valid and effective driving licence on the date of the accident, as his licence had expired on June 17, 2008—nearly two months before the incident.</p>.<p>Considering this aspect, the Commissioner rejected the claim against the insurer and ordered the school management to pay a compensation of Rs 5,38,200 with an annual interest of 12% from the date of the accident. </p>.<p>The school management, through its headmaster, challenged this order in the High Court. It argued that it was of the bona fide opinion that the insurance company had to pay the compensation, and hence, it did not appear before the Commissioner for Employees’ Compensation. </p>.<p>Justice Rao noted that the insurance company had successfully established the violation of the policy conditions that Badruddin did not have a valid licence to drive the vehicle on the date of the accident.</p>.<p>He cited the Supreme Court judgement in the Beli Ram case, which had reinforced the principle that it is the employer who bears the responsibility to ensure that the driver holds a valid and effective driving licence and that failure thereof constitutes a clear breach of policy conditions, absolving the insurer of liability. </p>
<p> Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka has upheld a Mangaluru court’s decision to fasten sole liability of a road accident on the management board of a school. </p>.<p>Justice K Manmadha Rao ruled that the vehicle owner is responsible for ensuring that the driver holds a valid and effective driving licence (DL).</p>.<p>He affirmed Rs 5.32-lakh compensation payable by the management of Balmi Primary School to the family of school bus driver Badruddin. </p>.<p>The accident occurred on a rainy day on August 14, 2008, when the school bus plunged into the Phalguni River. </p>.<p>The bus was returning from Ulaibettu to Balma English Medium School when the accident occurred around 9 am. Eleven people, including seven children and Badruddin, who was driving the school bus, died in the accident. </p>.<p>Badruddin’s wife and two children approached the Commissioner for Employees’ Compensation seeking Rs 13 lakh as compensation. However, the insurer of the school bus opposed the claim, citing violation of policy conditions and contending that the deceased driver did not possess a valid and effective driving licence on the date of the accident, as his licence had expired on June 17, 2008—nearly two months before the incident.</p>.<p>Considering this aspect, the Commissioner rejected the claim against the insurer and ordered the school management to pay a compensation of Rs 5,38,200 with an annual interest of 12% from the date of the accident. </p>.<p>The school management, through its headmaster, challenged this order in the High Court. It argued that it was of the bona fide opinion that the insurance company had to pay the compensation, and hence, it did not appear before the Commissioner for Employees’ Compensation. </p>.<p>Justice Rao noted that the insurance company had successfully established the violation of the policy conditions that Badruddin did not have a valid licence to drive the vehicle on the date of the accident.</p>.<p>He cited the Supreme Court judgement in the Beli Ram case, which had reinforced the principle that it is the employer who bears the responsibility to ensure that the driver holds a valid and effective driving licence and that failure thereof constitutes a clear breach of policy conditions, absolving the insurer of liability. </p>