National Insurance Company vs Surjeet Singh And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 9048 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 151/2002

National Insurance Company Limited, Branch officer, Faridkot (Punjab).

----Appellant Versus

1. Surjeet Singh son of Shri Arjun Singh

2. Hardeep Kaur wife of Surjeet Singh Both by caste Majabi sikh, resident of 8 P.S.D. Rawal Mandi, Tehsil Gharsana, Distt. Ganganagar.

(Claimants)

3. Dharmpal son of Shri Lal Chand Ji, by caste Khatri, resident of Bagha Purana, P.S. Bagha Purana, Teshil Moga, Distt. Faridkot (Punjab).

                                                                  ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)            :    Mr. Sanjeev Johari, Sr. Adv. Assisted
                                 by Mr. Subhankar Johari and Mr. Lalit
                                 Parihar
For Respondent(s)           :    None Present



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN

                                  Judgment

03/11/2023

1. The challenge in the present appeal is to the award dated

8.8.2001 passed in M.A.C. Case No.3/1996 on the file of learned

Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jodhpur, wherein and

whereby the claim for the compensation was partly allowed and

both the Insurance Company and the owner of the vehicle were

ordered to pay the compensation of Rs.16,312/- with interest at

the rate of 9% per annum from the date of claim petition till date

of realization.

2. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is at the instance

of the Insurance Company.

3. The contention of the learned counsel for the Insurance

Company is that the policy/cover-note was issued by the

Insurance Company on 4.3.1994 basing on the Cheque bearing

No.398045 date 4.3.1994 issued by the State Bank of India of Rs.

5,579/-. According to him, the policy/cover-note was issued

covering the liability of the owner w.e.f. 4.3.1994 to 3.3.1995 but

the policy/cover-note was cancelled after the Insurance Company

did not receive the premium amount due to the dishonour of

cheque by the bank. The information of this fact was intimated

vide memo dated 21.3.1994 and the cancellation notice was also

issued on 16.4.1994, but the same was returned unserved.

Whereas, the accident occurred on 11.12.1994, much after the

cancellation of policy/cover note was made. Therefore, the

Insurance Company is not liable to pay compensation.

4. None appeared for the claimant and the owner of the vehicle

despite service of notice.

5. The findings of the tribunal shows that the cheque was

dishonored and the premium was not paid to the Insurance

Company, and the dishonor of the cheque was intimated by

cancelling the policy/cover-note issued by the Insurance company

under Exhibit D-3 and D-4 and this fact was also noted by the

Tribunal. There is no counter-evidence from the owner of the

vehicle to show that further premium was paid to the Insurance

Company so that the policy/cover-note issued earlier was

continued. Admittedly, the accident occurred on 11.12.1994,

which is after the policy/cover-note was cancelled. The Tribunal

went wrong in holding that even though the policy/cover-note was

cancelled for non-payment of premium, the Insurance Company is

liable to pay the compensation. Since the contract itself is

cancelled, therefore, there is no question for the Tribunal in fixing

the liability on the Insurance Company.

In the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned award

fixing liability on the appellant-Insurance Company to pay the

awarded compensation, is set aside. The Insurance Company is

exonerated from its liability and the owner shall pay the

compensation. The amount already paid in pursuance of interim

direction shall be recovered from the owner of the vehicle. If the

amount is not paid to the claimants, the appellant is entitled to

get back such amount.

(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J

34-mSingh/ Hanuman/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)