NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., CHANDIGARH Vs. PRANAY SETH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal by the insurance company is against the liability cast on the insurer in spite of the fact that the insurance company was able to establish through a verification report that the driving licence was not genuine. The Tribunal found that the burden of proof was on the insurer to establish that the licence was not genuine and no witness from the Licensing Authority had been examined. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant states that the insurance company did not have any adequate opportunity to examine witness from the licensing authority since the document itself was filed before the Tribunal only on the last hearing date on 05.10.2010 and soon after the document was produced, they were able to secure the verification report through the licensing authority and therefore, the reasoning of the Tribunal was not appropriate.

(2.) EVEN if the contention of the insurance company were to be accepted that the driving licence was really a fake one and that could be covered by the fact that even the driver had admitted to the fact that he had not gone Nagaland at any time to secure the driving licence and it had been secured through an agent, I will not find this to afford to the insurance company a right to contend that the insured is not entitled to indemnity. The owner himself was examined as RW -1 and he stated in the cross -examination thus : -