N.V. Dhananjaya vs The New India Assurance Company Limited

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimant is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 10th October 2008, passed in MVC No. 8568/2005, by the Judge, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, (for short, ''Tribunal''), on the ground that the Tribunal is not justified in directing the respondents 2 and 3 to indemnify the award equally.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the claimant/appellant and learned counsel appearing for insurer.

Learned counsel appearing for appellant has filed I.A. I/2014, producing thereto a Xerox copy of the Insurance Policy issued by the New India Assurance Company Limited and submitted that the Tribunal, while awarding compensation has directed the respondents 2 and 3 to equally indemnify the award amount, on the ground that no documentary evidence was produced to establish that the vehicle was insured as on the date of accident. He submitted that the copy of the said Insurance Policy could not be produced before the Tribunal due to unavoidable circumstances and the same is now being produced by way of I.A. No. 1/2014. Therefore, he submitted that, the said application be allowed and the matter be remanded back to Tribunal to enable both the parties to adduce additional oral and documentary evidence to substantiate the prayer sought in the said I.A.

In reply to the said submission, learned counsel appearing for Insurer submitted that, the matter may be remanded, permitting the Insurer to adduce additional oral and documentary evidence by filing necessary application.

The said submission of the learned counsel appearing for both the parties is placed on record.

After going through the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal, it is seen that the Tribunal has observed that the first respondent is the insurer of the autorickshaw and 2nd respondent is the owner of the said autorickshaw according to the appellant and the first respondent has denied the policy and its liability since no insurance particulars are furnished. Further, it has observed that even at the stage of the evidence of respondents, neither the appellant nor the respondents have produced any documentary or oral evidence to consider that the vehicle is insured as on the date of accident.

Now, learned counsel appearing for appellant has filed I.A. No. 1/2014, producing a copy of the Insurance Policy insured with the first respondent.

Therefore, I am of the opinion that the matter requires re-consideration by Tribunal, permitting both the parties to adduce additional oral and documentary evidence in support of the claim made by the appellant in the said I.A..

Accordingly, in the light of the statements made and for the reasons stated in the affidavit accompanying the application, I.A. No. 1/2014 is allowed. Appellant is permitted to produce the additional document, viz. the Insurance Policy issued by the first respondent/Insurer before the Tribunal and adduce additional oral and documentary evidence in support of the claim made therein.

Thus, without expressing any opinion on the merits or demerits of the case, it would suffice for this Court if the matter is remanded back to Tribunal to enable the parties to adduce additional oral and documentary evidence.

In the light of the discussion made above, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed.

The impugned judgment and award dated 10th October 2008, passed in MVC No. 8568/2005, by the Judge, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, is hereby set aside;

Matter stands remitted back to the Tribunal to re-do the same afresh and decide the matter expeditiously, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties;

Parties are permitted to file necessary application to adduce additional oral and documentary evidence, if any, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment;

In case such applications are filed by the parties, the Tribunal is directed to receive the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, in compliance of the direction issued above.

Further, the parties are directed to appear before the jurisdictional Tribunal, either personally or through their counsel, on 15-12-2014 at 11:00 A.M., and collect the further date of hearing;

All the grounds urged by the parties are left open;

Office is directed to return the LCRs, if any, to the jurisdictional Tribunal, forthwith."