Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Ram Chander and Others

Reva Khetrapal, J.—The present appeal is filed against the judgment and award dated 08.01.2010 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delhi in Suit No. 29-A/2003, whereby the Appellant - Insurance Company was held liable to pay to the claimants (the Respondents No. 1 and 2 herein) a sum of Rs. 4,36,800/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, if any, from the date of filing of the petition till the date of its realization.

Notice issued to the Respondents No. 1 and 2, who are the claimants, and the Respondent No. 3, who is the owner of the offending vehicle, is served. The counsel for the Respondent No. 3 has entered appearance, while the claimants are unrepresented.

With the consent of the parties, the matter is admitted and taken up for final hearing at this stage.

The sole grievance of the Appellant - Insurance Company in the present appeal is that the Appellant - Insurance Company is not liable to pay the award amount and in the alternative is entitled to recovery right in favour of the Appellant and against the Respondent No. 3 - the owner of the offending vehicle.

Mr. Pradeep Gaur, the learned Counsel for the Appellant contends that the Appellant - Insurance Company had examined a witness R1W1, namely, Gurbax Rai Chawla, Deputy Manager, on behalf of the Insurance Company, who proved on record the driving license verification report of the driver of the offending vehicle received from the Licensing Authority Guwahati, Assam, mentioning therein that the said driving license was not issued by the said Authority. Mr. Gaur submits that the Insurance Company had also summoned the witness from the concerned Licensing Authority Kamrup, Guwahati, but despite service of the said notice the witness did not appear. It is further pointed out that a sum of Rs. 8,000/- was deposited on 10th March, 2008 towards diet money for the summoning of the said witness.

The aforesaid facts are not disputed by the learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 3 - owner, who did not appear before the learned Tribunal and was proceeded ex party, and now states that he has no objection to the Appellant being allowed to adduce additional evidence by examining the witness from the Licensing Authority Kamrup, Guwahati.

In view of the aforesaid, the case is remanded back to the concerned Tribunal with permission to the Appellant to examine the witness from the Licensing Authority Kamrup, Guwahati. The learned Tribunal shall issue notice for appearance of the parties before it on a date fixed by it and thereafter shall proceed further in the matter, so as to enable it to pass directions for the summoning of the witness from Licensing Authority Kamrup, Guwahati, Assam, i.e., the concerned Transport Authority.

Liberty is given to the Respondent No. 3 on his verbal prayer to move an application for setting aside of the ex-party order passed against the Respondent No. 3 and thereafter for adducing evidence with the permission of the concerned Tribunal. It is clarified that the deposited amount shall be disbursed to the claimants, i.e., the Respondents No. 1 and 2 as per the order of the Tribunal and after the Appellant and the Respondent No. 3 have adduced their respective evidence, the Tribunal shall consider the matter afresh only in respect of the breach of the conditions of the insurance policy and grant of recovery rights to the Appellant against the Respondent No. 3.

MAC. APP. 233/2010 and CM Nos. 6899/2010 and 6900/2010 stand disposed of accordingly. The statutory deposited amount of Rs. 25,000/- shall be refunded to the Appellant, as prayed.