Pardeep Singh vs National Insurance Co. Ltd.
2009 Latest Caselaw 5052 Del

13
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                      +   MAC.APP.No.139/2009

                               Date of Decision: 7th December, 2009
%

      PARDEEP SINGH                             ..... Appellant
                           Through : Mr. S.N. Parashar, Adv.

                      versus

      NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.        ..... Respondent
                    Through : Mr. D.K. Sharma, Adv.


CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

1.      Whether Reporters of Local papers may                 NO
        be allowed to see the Judgment?

2.      To be referred to the Reporter or not?                NO

3.      Whether the judgment should be                        NO
        reported in the Digest?

                          JUDGMENT (Oral)

CM No.3251/2009

1. For the reasons stated in the application and noting

that the appellant has good case on merits, the delay in filing

of this appeal is condoned.

2. CM stands disposed of.

MAC.APP. 139/2009, CM No.3250/2009 and CM No.3252/2009

1. The appellant is the owner of the offending vehicle

No.DL-1PA-7719 which was being driven by Sukhvender

Singh at the time of the accident. The accident resulted in

the injuries to Deepak Kumar who filed the claim petition

before the learned Tribunal.

2. The learned Tribunal passed an award for Rs.2,03,900/-

in favour of Deepak Kumar and against the appellant and

recovery rights were granted to respondent No.1 to recover

the award amount from the appellant after making payment

to the claimant on the ground that the driver of the offending

vehicle was not holding a valid driving licence at the time of

the accident.

3. Along with this appeal, the appellant has produced the

driving licence No.K819/MTR/98 dated 18 th November, 1998

issued by Licencing Authority, Mathura. The appellant has

also filed verification report dated 27th July, 2009 with

respect to the said licence.

4. Vide order dated 6th March, 2009, respondent No.1 was

directed to verify the said licence in pursuance to which

respondent No.1 has verified the licence. The learned

counsel for respondent No.1 submits that the licence dated

18th November, 1998 has been found to be genuine.

However, the learned counsel for the respondent submits

that this licence was not available with the appellant at any

stage during the proceedings before the learned Tribunal and

the appellant could not have held two licences at the same

time. The issue raised by learned counsel for respondent

No.1 need consideration and may also require recording of

evidence.

5. In the facts and circumstances of this case, the appeal

is allowed and the impugned award is set aside in so far as

the recovery rights have been granted to respondent No.1

against the appellant and this issue is remanded back to the

learned Tribunal who shall pass a fresh award after granting

adequate opportunity to the parties to lead additional

evidence on this issue. The award of compensation to the

claimants is upheld and the appellant shall not be entitled to

challenge the quantum of compensation awarded to the

claimants.

6. CM No.3252/2009 under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code

of Civil Procedure is allowed. CM No.3250/2009 stands

dismissed.

7. The parties are directed to appear before the learned

Tribunal on 7th January, 2010.

8. The LCR be sent back forthwith to the learned Tribunal.

9. Copy of this order be given 'Dasti' to learned counsel

for the parties under the signature of Court Master.

J.R. MIDHA, J

DECEMBER 07, 2009 aj