Delhi High Court
Sunder @ Sunderi Devi & Ors. vs Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd ... on 20 February, 2014
Author: Suresh Kait
$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 20th February, 2014
+ MAC.APP. No.77/2012
SUNDER @ SUNDERI DEVI & ORS. ..... Appellants
Represented by: Mr. Peeush Sharma, Advocate.
Versus
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD & ORS. ..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr.P.Acharya for Mr.Sameer
Nandwani, Advocate for Respondent
No.1/Insurance Company.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1. The present appeal has been preferred against the impugned award
dated 15.10.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted compensation
for an amount of Rs.14,18,200/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum
from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.
2. The appellants are aggrieved with the findings of the learned Tribunal
that the Insurance Company is not liable to pay any compensation,
accordingly directed the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to pay the compensation
amount in favour of the appellants, hence the present appeal.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants/claimants
submits that the respondent No.1/Insurance Company examined Shri
Navneet Goel, Assistance Manager (Legal) of the company as R3W1, who
deposed that the policy cover note No.109000677707 from book
No.90135542 was lost on 22.01.2010 from the custody of Destimoney
Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., regarding which the said company intimated the
respondent insurance company on 27.10.2010, accordingly an FIR got
lodged on the same day.
4. Ld. Counsel further submitted that during cross-examination, R3W1
stated that the respondent company did not get any premium against the said
cover note and he could not tell as to who had received the cash against the
said cover note.
5. Moreover, the said witness has categorically admitted that the
respondent company did not inform about the loss of cover note to the owner
of the vehicle or the authority concerned.
6. Learned counsel further submitted that respondent Nos. 2 and 3, i.e.,
driver and owner of the offending vehicle filed their written statement,
wherein, the respondent No.3/owner of the offending vehicle has specifically
admitted that the vehicle was insured with respondent No.1 and accordingly
produced the cover note of the same.
7. It is an admitted fact that neither the book of the cover note was
produced before the learned Tribunal nor the informant of the FIR was
examined by the respondent company. It is also admitted that no
information was given to the owner of the vehicle or the concerned authority
regarding missing of the cover note or registration of the FIR.
8. I note, the informant of the FIR was Rahul Kumar, however, the
counsel for respondent No.1/Insurance Company failed to tell this court
under what capacity the said Rahul Kumar lodged the FIR regarding missing
of the cover note.
9. When such a dispute arises and the owner of the vehicle produced the
cover note and states on oath that his vehicle was insured with the Insurance
Company and; if the said cover note is found not valid or forged and; the
intimation regarding missing of the said cover note has not been given to the
concerned authority or the owner of the vehicle, then in such an eventuality,
liability to pay the compensation rests upon the Insurance Company.
10. For the loss of cover note in question FIR was lodged. Both the
parties are not aware about the outcome of the FIR. If, after investigation,
the police has filed charge-sheet against the owner of the offending vehicle,
then the insurance company is entitled to recover the amount from him,
otherwise not.
11. In view of the above discussion, I am of the considered opinion that
the learned Tribunal has erred in not fastening the liability upon the
Insurance Company. Accordingly, the respondent No.1/Insurance Company
is held responsible to deposit the compensation amount in the first instance
and thereafter recover the same from respondent no.3, owner of the
offending vehicle in view of Para 10 above.
12. Consequently, order dated 15.10.2011 is set aside to the extent as
stated in Para 11 above.
13. Consequently, the respondent No.1/Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the entire compensation amount with up-to-date interest accrued
thereon with the Registrar General of this Court within a period of five
weeks from today.
14. On deposit, the Registrar General shall release the award amount in
favour of the respondents/claimants as per the terms and conditions fixed by
the learned Tribunal in its order dated 15.10.2011 on taking necessary steps
by them.
15. Accordingly, the instant appeal is allowed.
SURESH KAIT, J.
FEBRUARY 20, 2014
Sb/jg
