Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Upender Kumar Mandal & Ors.
2013 Latest Caselaw 5005 Del

$~9
*   IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                     Judgment delivered on: 30th October, 2013


+                                   MAC.APP. 181/2011

       ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.                ..... Appellant
                    Represented by: Mr.Mohan Babu Aggarwal,
                                    Advocate.

                             Versus

       UPENDER KUMAR MANDAL & ORS.                              ..... Respondents
                   Represented by: None.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

CM No.4308/2011 (for delay)

1. Vide the instant application, the applicant/appellant company is seeking condonation of delay of 166 days in filing the instant appeal.

2. It is stated in Para 9 of the instant application that appellant/ Insurance Company has filed the present appeal seeking the recovery rights.

3. The accident occurred on 29.09.2007 in which respondent No.1 sustained injuries. He filed the claim petition on 17.12.2007 and the impugned award was passed by the learned Tribunal on 04.05.2010. It is admitted in the instant application that the counsel for the

appellant/Insurance Company, who appeared before the learned Tribunal had intimated the appellant company in the month of June, 2010 about the impugned judgment being passed on 04.05.2010.

4. It is further stated that the driving licence was found to be fake on its verification. Verification report was sent by Ferozabad Divisional Office vide their letter dated 24.09.2010, whereas the impugned award was passed vide order dated 04.05.2010.

5. Undisputedly, on driving licence being found fake, neither any ground was taken by the appellant/Insurance Company in the written statement nor the learned Tribunal has framed any issue on this aspect. Moreover, the appellant/Insurance Company has relied upon the report of Mr. Navratan Singh, Advocate. (Investigator Service).

6. As per the report of the said Investigator, the licence was not issued in the name of Gulam Nabi, i.e., the driver of the offending vehicle. The said report was received on 23.09.2010. Despite that the appellant did not bother to file the appeal. Thus, delay has not been properly explained.

7. Moreover, during the course of the trial, neither the appellant/Insurance Company has raised the issue on this aspect nor bother to take the verification report of the said licence, whereas the accident took place in the year 2007.

8. It is pertinent to mention here that vide order dated 06.09.2013, another connected appeal bearing MAC. Appeal No.147/2011 arising out of

the accident in question was also dismissed by this Court on account of delay.

9. I do not find any ground to condone the delay. Therefore this application is dismissed.

MAC.APP. 181/2011 CM No.4310/2013 (for leading additional evidence)

With the dismissal of the application seeking condition of delay, both the appeal and the application have become infructuous. The same are disposed of accordingly.

SURESH KAIT, J.

OCTOBER 30, 2013 sb