ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. MUKESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the Appellant - Insurance Company against the judgment dated 20th May, 2010 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi awarding a sum of 26,000/- in favour of the Respondent No. 1 as compensation for the injury sustained by the Respondent No. 1 in a road accident, which allegedly took place on account of the rash and negligent driving of the Respondent No. 2. The vehicle was owned by the Respondent No. 3 and the Appellant - Insurance Company was stated to be the owner thereof.

(2.) Notice of the claim petition instituted by the Respondent No. 1 was duly served upon the Appellant - Insurance Company and the Respondents No. 2 and 3 viz., the driver and the owner of the alleged offending vehicle. The Respondents No. 2 and 3 did not choose to appear and were accordingly proceeded ex parte. The Appellant - Insurance Company, though it filed written statement denying the insurance of the offending vehicle and stating that the cover note bearing No. 008400 allegedly issued in the name of the Respondent No. 3 (the insured) was a fake cover note, failed to adduce any evidence in respect thereof.

(3.) It is the case of the Appellant - Insurance Company that it was at the instance of the learned Tribunal that the counsel for the Insurance Company stopped appearing and also did not lead any evidence to prove that the insurance cover note as well as the driving licence were fake. It is further the case of the Appellant - Insurance Company that the investigator of the Insurance Company vide its letter dated 3rd June, 2008 obtained verification report from the concerned licencing authority viz., RTA, Karnal, wherein the said authority has clearly mentioned that DL No. 60510 was never issued in anyone's name as per their records. Thus, the Tribunal erred in not granting recovery rights to the Appellant against the driver and owner of the offending vehicle.