Delhi High Court
National Insurance Co Ltd vs Linu Kumar & Ors on 30 November, 2017
$~R-599
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 30th November, 2017
+ MAC. APPEAL No.995/2012
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate.
versus
LINU KUMAR & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. On the accident claim case (Suit No. 732/2010/2008), instituted
on 12.03.2008, by the first respondent (the claimant) seeking
compensation for injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicular
accident that occurred on 12.02.2008, on the averments that he
suffered injuries due to negligent driving of Maruti van bearing
registration No. DL-3CR-4782 (the van), by the third respondent,
liability to pay Rs.1,00,037/- as compensation, was placed at the door
of the appellant (insurer), the Tribunal holding it to be the company
which had issued the insurance policy, reference in this context being
made to a document purporting to be a cover note issued at the
instance of the second respondent (registered owner of the van).
2. The insurance company in appeal reiterates that it had never
issued any such cover note and, therefore, the finding returned by the
Tribunal ignoring the evidence led is unjustified.
3. The second and third respondents, though served, have chosen
not to contest the appeal. It is noted that they had chosen to suffer the
proceedings before the Tribunal ex parte.
4. The insurance company had led evidence by examining K.K.
Mittal, Assistant Manager (R1W1), and Ajay Kumar Jain, investigator
(R1W2), their testimonies having remained unrebutted and
unchallenged. The evidence of the said witnesses clearly brought
home the fact that the cover note relied upon by the claimant, and
seemingly also by the second and third respondents was a fake
document, it having never been issued by or at the instance of the
insurance company.
5. In these circumstances, the finding returned by the Tribunal
holding the insurance company liable is found to be uncalled for. The
said finding is set aside. The direction to the insurance company to
pay the compensation is, thus, vacated. The claimant is at liberty to
enforce the award against the other respondents.
6. By orders dated 07.09.2012 and 27.11.2013, the insurance
company was directed to deposit the entire awarded amount with up to
date interest with Registrar General as a pre-condition to stay against
execution. The amount deposited along with interest accrued, shall be
refunded to the insurance company. The statutory deposit shall also
be refunded to the appellant.
7. The appeal stands disposed of in above terms.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
NOVEMBER 30, 2017//srb
