Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Mohd. Avdul & Ors
2012 Latest Caselaw 3129 Del

$~8
*        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                      Date of decision: 10th May, 2012

+        MAC. APP. No.260/2011 & CM. APPL 5828/2011(stay)

         ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD       ..... Appellant
                      Through: Ms. Manjusha Wadhwa,
                               Advocate

                        Versus

         MOHD. AVDUL & ORS.
                                                  ..... Respondents
                             Through:      None

         CORAM:
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

                             JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The Appellant impugns a judgment dated 12.01.2011 whereby while awarding a compensation of `3,75,000/- in favour of the Respondents No.1 and 2, the Appellant's plea for exoneration to satisfy the award was rejected.

2. The case of the Appellant Insurance Company is that the driving licence held by the Respondent No.3 Sonu on investigation was found to be fake. I need not delve into this question in detail as it is established on record that the owner of the vehicle Respondent No.4 took reasonable care to see that the

vehicle (two-wheeler No.DL-9SV-0974) is driven by a duly licensed person. The owner's testimony (as R2W1) that the Respondent No.3 borrowed the vehicle from him for some urgent work and he saw the driving licence possessed by the Respondent No.3 which appeared to be in order, was not challenged in the cross-examination.

3. The case is squarely covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Lehru & Ors., (2003) 3 SCC 338 and National Insurance Company Limited v. Swaran Singh & Ors., (2004) 3 SCC 297. The Appellant was rightly fastened with the liability to indemnity the insured.

4. The Appeal is without any merit; the same is accordingly dismissed.

5. The balance amount lying with the Registrar General of this Court shall be released in favour of the Respondents No.1 and 2 in terms of the order passed by the Claims Tribunal.

6. The statutory amount of `25,000/- shall be refunded to the Appellant Insurance Company.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE MAY 10, 2012 pst