EJAZ AHMAD Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 is directed against the order dated 30 -3 1995 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kanpur Dehat by which the claimant's appeal was allowed and sum of Rs. 22,000/ was awarded against the appellants who are the owner of the vehicle and driver.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are the owners of the vehicle, namely, tempo No. U.P. 77/9493. On 2 -10 -1991 at about 5 p.m. Km. Rubi was going on a dipper (footpath) along with his brother Vinod when a tempo No. UP 77 9493 on account of negligence and rash driving of the driver without giving any horn dashed Km. Rubi with the result she had fallen and suffered in her left leg. Tribunal on consideration of the entire facts and circumstances awarded a sum of Rs. 22,000/ to the claimant against the appellants. The claim of the appellant before the Tribunal was that the vehicle was insured with the United India Insurance Company Ltd. and thus United India Insurance Company was liable for the payment of award. Tribunal however, held that the insurance of the vehicle was from 7 -10 -1991 to 6 -10 -1992 and as such on the date of the accident which took place on 2 -10 -1991, the vehicle was not insured. The claim of the appellant was that the vehicle was insured for the period from 1 -10 -1991 to 30 -9 -1992. Being aggrieved by the order of Tribunal, the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) A short question which arise for consideration in the present appeal is whether the vehicle No. U.P.77 -9493 was insured from 1 -10 -1991 to 30 -9 -1992 as claimed by the appellant or from 7 -10 1991 to 6 -10 -1992 as held by the Tribunal, Record of the lower Court is available for perusal and adjudication of the claim, three documents are relevant, I -Insurance cover note No. 30789 which is admittedly signed by Sri Vijai Kumar Nigam Development Officer in which the period of Insurance mentioned is from 1 -10 1991 to 30 -9 -1992. A perusal of the Insurance Cover note (document No. 90) shows that there is a over writing on the date 1 and 3. There is no over writing on any other date. Insurance pass book (document No. 90 -B) period of Insurance shown is from 1 10 -1991 to 30 -9 -1992. A renewal notice No. 30789, signed by Sri Vinai Kumar Nigam Development Officer. In this notice, the period of Insurance shown is from 7 -10 -1991 to 6 -10 -1992. The appellant contended that the Insurance premium at Rs. 660 was given to an agent. Sri Sudhir Kumar Srivastava, DW 3 on 1 -10 1991 Sri Sudhir Kumar Srivastava, DW 3 in his statement admitted that the owner of the vehicle had given 660 on 1 -10 -1991 in afternoon and on the same day he went to deposit the money at 3.30 p.m. which could not be deposited due to the closure of the cash and thus he had given the money to the Development Officer Sri Nigam on which he had issued insurance certificate No. 30789 at 4.30 p.m. which was given to the owner of the vehicle. About the renewal of notice he stated that it was the notice for renewal of the Insurance and he is not aware that the insurance was earlier done. He denied that on back date any forge certificate was issued. The statement of V.K. Nigam DW 5 Development Officer United India Insurance Company was also recorded. Sri V.K. Nigam stated in his statement that the certificate of Insurance No. 30789 for the period of 1 -10 -1991 to 30 -9 -1992 bears my signature and it was issued by me on 7 -10 1991 at 4 p.m., it does not bear policy number. He stated that policy was taken on 7 -10 -1991 and the agent has not given any information about the accident. Sri Nigam also stated that in the certificate 7 was made 1, 6, was made 30 and 10 was made nine. Statement of S.S. Dwivedi Administrative Officer United India Insurance Company DW 4 was also recorded. He stated that the vehicle was insured from 7 -10 -1991 to 6 -10 -1992. He further stated that the premium amount at Rs. 660 was deposited on 8 -10 1991 for which receipt No. 668184 dated 8 -10 -1991 was issued against which the certificate No. 30789 was issued. It has been further stated that by over writing in the certificate date 1 -10 1991 to 30 -9 -1992 was mentioned. The aforesaid documents and statement were examined by the Tribunal. Learned Judge, Tribunal has held that in fact Insurance cover note was issued for the period 7 -10 -1991 to 6 -10 -1991 and by over writing it was made 1 10 -1991 to 30 -9 -1992. Tribunal further found that the money was deposited on 8th and the notice for the renewal in which there is no cutting on the date shows that it was for the period 7 -10 1991 to 6 -10 -1992. The Tribunal accordingly come to the conclusion that the vehicle was not insured on the date of the accident and was insured from 7 -10 -1991 to 6 -10 -1992 and accordingly held the owners of the vehicle liable for payment of award.