Reliance General Insurance Co ... vs Udal Singh & Ors.
2013 Latest Caselaw 4655 Del

$~16
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                  Judgment delivered on: 7th October, 2013

+                         MAC.APP. No.735/2011


       RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD.         ..... Appellant
                    Represented by: Mr.K.L.Nandwani, Advocate.

                          Versus

       UDAL SINGH & ORS.                                      ..... Respondents
                     Represented by:          None.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

MAC.APP. No.735/2011

1. The present appeal is preferred against the impugned award dated 01.06.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted Rs.80,000/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the notice under Order XXI Rule 1 CPC was served.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company has argued that the driver of the offending vehicle was not having the valid driving licence on the date of the accident, i.e., 09.06.2008, despite that the learned Tribunal has not granted recovery rights in favour of the appellant/Insurance Company.

3. To support his contention, the learned counsel has relied upon the case of Sarla Verma Vs. DTC and Ors. 2009 (6) SCC 121, and submitted that in case there is no valid driving licence, then the appellant/Insurance Company is entitled for recovery rights.

4. I note, the appellant/Insurance Company has failed to produce any witness from the concerned Transport Authority before the learned Tribunal and only relied upon a report Ex.RW1/8 filed by the Investigator, wherein it is stated that the official of the concerned Authority has refused to verify the driving licence. It is further informed that the driving licence bearing No.A- 88915/MEERUT was not issued by the said office.

5. Significantly, perusal of the report Ex.RW1/8 shows that the verification is contradictory. Moreover, it is stated that the official of the concerned Authority has refused to verify the driving licence and it is informed that driving licence was not issued from their office. Further, neither any witness from the said Authority has been produced before the learned Tribunal nor any application has been moved by the appellant/Insurance Company before this Court for leading additional evidence to prove that the said licence was fake. Therefore, the learned Tribunal has rightly not relied upon the verification report mentioned above.

6. In view of the above, I am of the considered view that the learned Tribunal has rightly not granted any recovery rights in favour of the appellant/Insurance Company.

7. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the instant appeal. The same is accordingly dismissed.

8. Consequently, the Registrar General of this Court is directed to release the compensation amount along with upto date interest accrued thereon in favour of the respondent No.1/claimant on taking necessary steps by him.

9. Statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- shall be released in favour of the appellant/Insurance Company.

CM No. 15164/2011 (for stay)

With the dismissal of the appeal itself, the instant application has become infructuous. The same is accordingly dismissed.

SURESH KAIT, J.

OCTOBER 07, 2013 sb