Jharkhand High Court
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Gurdev Singh Phull on 9 April, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
(Civil Miscellaneous Appellate Jurisdiction)
M.A. No. 32 of 2018
..........
United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum
............Appellant
Versus
1.Gurdev Singh Phull
2.Bhupinder Kaur
3.Ranjita Kaur
4.Gagandeep Singh Phull
5.Ramandeep Singh Phull
6.Sethi Transport, represented by its proprietor, Mamta Jain
....... Respondents.
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
-----
For the Appellant : Mr. Alok Lal, Advocate
For the Resps./claimants : Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate
For the Resp. No.6 : Mr. Rajiv Anand, Advocate
.........
05/Dated: 09/04/2021
1. Heard, learned counsel for the parties.
2. The United India Insurance Company Ltd. has preferred the instant
Miscellaneous Appeal against the award dated 20.06.2017 passed by learned District
Judge-III- cum- Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Jamshedpur, in
Compensation Case No.280 of 2014, whereby the claimants, (1).Gurdev Singh Phull,
(2).Bhupinder Kaur, (3).Ranjita Kaur, (4).Gagandeep Singh Phull and (5).Ramandeep
Singh Phull have been awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.18,15,000/- along
with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till its
payment to be paid within 30 days of the award. However, the amount already paid
under Section 140 of the MV Act shall be deducted from the said amount.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Alok Lal has submitted that appeal has been
preferred mainly against the finding recorded by the learned Tribunal as the learned
Tribunal has not considered the issue no.(iii) i.e. "Whether the owner of the vehicle
has violated any terms and condition of the policy including requirement of valid
driving licence?
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that it was incumbent upon
the owner of the vehicle, to comply the condition as envisaged under Section 134 (c)
of the MV Act as the Insurance Company has taken a plea in the written statement
that though the vehicle bearing Registration No.JH-01AL-1603 was insured before
the Insurance Company vide Policy No. 210604/31/11/01/00010125 which was valid
for the period from 00:00 Hours on 14.03.2012 to mid night on 13.03.2013, but if the
terms and conditions of the policy are not violated.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that since the owner has
appeared before the learned Tribunal as OP No.1 on 21.11.2015 and sufficient
opportunity has been given to file show-cause before the learned Tribunal but O.P.
No.1 (owner) has failed to file show-cause before the learned Tribunal and thus,
learned Tribunal in terms of order dated 08.06.2016 debarred the O.P. No.1 (owner)
from filing Show-cause.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that since these documents
have not been brought on record, as such, learned Tribunal has not adjudicated the
issue in its correct perspective even though there was pleading on the part of the
Insurance Company.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that it is mandatory duty of
the owner of the vehicle to file such document in compliance of Section 134 of the
MV Act, as such, impugned judgment passed by the learned Tribunal is bad in law.
8. Learned counsel for the Claimants, Mr. Deepak Kumar assisted by learned
counsel, Mr. Praveen Kumar has submitted that though relief sought by the Insurance
Company is against the owner of the offending vehicle and issue no.(iii) has been
decided by the learned Tribunal at para 10, running pages 10 and 11, of the
impugned Award. Since the Insurance Company has failed to discharge burden of
proof regarding violation of terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy, as such, the
learned Tribunal has not considered the issue in the way the Insurance Company
wants to place before this Court. As such, this Court may not give an opportunity to
the Insurance Company for adjudicating the issue, which has not been proved by
adducing evidence as contemplated under Section 103 of the Indian Evidence Act. It
was incumbent upon the Insurance Company to file an application for direction upon
the O.P. No.1 (owner) to produce certain documents, which they want to examine to
verify regarding the terms and conditions of the policy i.e. whether the owner has
violated any of them. But in absence of any such documents and in absence of any
evidence the learned Tribunal has justified in not considering the same because of the
laches on the part of the Insurance Company, as such, this Court may not interfere
with the same.
9. Considering the rival submissions of the parties, looking into the facts and
circumstances of the case, it is a case where the vehicle is insured and only the
issue which has been agitated by the Insurance Company is regarding violation of
terms and conditions of the policy. It is also apparent from the impugned award
that no evidence has been laid by the Insurance Company to establish that there
was violation of terms and conditions of the policy.
From perusal of the impugned order it also appears that O.P. No.1 (owner
of the offending vehicle) has appeared but even after giving sufficient opportunity,
no written statement was filed and the O.P. No.1 has been debarred from filing
written statement. Even then the Insurance Company has not filed any application
before the learned Tribunal so as to agitate the issue that it is incumbent upon the
owner of the offending vehicle to comply the same under Section 134 (c) of the
MV Act.
Accordingly, the evidence, which has not been adduced before the learned
Tribunal cannot be adduced before this Court in appeal. As such, this Court in
absence of any evidence brought on record by the Insurance Company is not
inclined to interfere with this appeal preferred by the Insurance Company.
10. Accordingly, The instant Miscellaneous Appeal is hereby dismissed.
11. I.A. No.1124 of 2018 filed. for condonation of delay is hereby closed.
12. Learned Registrar General of this Court is directed to remit the Statutory
amount within four weeks to the learned Tribunal/Executing Court which shall be
paid to the surviving claimants and the balance amount of award along with the
interest in terms of the award of learned Tribunal shall be indemnified by the
Insurance Company within a reasonable time as the occurrence is dated
10.08.2012.
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
sandeep/
