NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. RUBY RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant has not taken steps for substitution of legal heirs of deceased Respondent no.8. The appeal against Respondent no.8 abates. Steps have also not been taken for service of Respondent no.7 repeatedly. This appeal was filed in the year 2011. Appeal against Respondent no.7 is dismissed.

(2.) IT is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellant that the Insurance Company proved breach of the terms and conditions of policy and therefore, the Appellant is entitled to recover the amount of compensation paid from the owner i.e. Respondent no.7 herein.

(3.) APART from the fact that the appeal has been dismissed against Respondent no.7 by an order passed above, it may be noted that the Appellant did not take any steps to require the owner to produce the driving licence of the driver which might have been seen by him at the time of employing the driver. The insured was not given any notice to produce the original insurance policy or the driving licence of the driver. It is not proved by the Appellant that the copy of the driving licence available on the Trial Court record (mark A) was produced by the insured before the Claims Tribunal. Even no witness was examined or even summoned to prove that the copy of the licence which is marked A was not genuine. The Appellant was content to produce the Deputy Manager who deposed that as per the record, the driving licence was not on the computer line. Testimony of RW -2 is extracted hereunder: