ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. DEEPAK KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of Civil Revision Petitions 3356 and 3357 of 1991, both arising out of one claim petition, though directed against two orders passed on two different dates, as noticed hereinafter.

(2.) CLAIMANT -respondents filed claim petition Under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act in December, 1988 claiming compensation for the death of Ram Sarup father of respondents 1 to 6 and husband of respondent No. 7, who died in a motor accident. It was alleged that Ram Sarup (deceased) was going on a Scooter which was hit by an Ambassador Car bearing registration No. D. L. Y. 1652 as a result of which he died. The petitioner Insurance Company being the insurer of the car was also arrayed as respondent in the claim petition. The Insurance Company filed writ-ten statement in the claim petition wherein it was stated that its liability was limited to the extent of Rs. 1,50,000/ -. After about two years of the filing of the written statement the petitioner-company moved an application for amendment of the written statement on the allegations that since the copy of the insurance policy sent by the concerned Branch Office to the counsel representing the Insurance Company was not legible, the legal plea regarding liability of the insurance company could not be properly pleaded and that as per the terms of the insurance policy the liability of the petitioner-company was limited to Rs. 50,000.00 only and not Rs. 1,50,000.00 as already pleaded in the written statement. The claimants opposed the prayer made in the application by filing a reply. It was stated that in the written statement the Insurance Company had made an admission that its liability is Rs. 1,50,000.00 and therefore, the petitioner company was estopped from filing the application for amendment of the written statement.

(3.) HAVING failed in its endeavour to plead the factum of its liability, properly suiting to its defence, the petitioner insurance company in less than a month of the dismissal of its application for amendment of the written statement, moved another application, but this time for additional evidence. It was alleged in the application that the Insurance Company wanted to place on record the original carbon copy of the insurance policy because the figures on the carbon copy, already produced and exhibited as Exhibit R. 1 were not clear and legible. It was further alleged that since the copy of the telegram Exhibit R-3 produced in evidence by Ramesh Adwani, Assistant Divisional Manager of the petitioner was objected to by the opposite counsel, it was necessary to examine the scribe of the original premium receipt in order to prove the exact amount of premium and to produce on record the original carbon copy of the premium receipt and the certified copy of telegram sent to the insured. Prayer made in this application as well, was opposed by the claimants by filing a reply. It was alleged that the figures in the insurance policy Exhibit R. 1 were quite clear and the same were admitted by Ramesh Adwani, Assistant Divisional Manager appearing as a witness on behalf of the petitioner Insurance Company and that every carbon copy is a true copy of the original and no carbon copy can be termed as original carbon copy. Learned Tribunal on a consideration of the matter, dismissed this application also by this order dated 17. 8. 1991. The application was dismissed primarily on two grounds. Firstly, the petitioner company failed to conclude its evidence in spite of availing six long adjournments and thus its evidence had been closed by court order. Secondly, the learned Tribunal noticed that Ramesh Adwani, RW-1 did not state while appearing as a witness that insurance policy Exhibit R. 1 is not legible. It was also observed by the learned Tribunal that even otherwise, once the aforesaid witness had deposed that the certified copy of the telegram could be obtained from the Postal Department and this fact was within the knowledge of the Insurance Company but still the certified copy was not obtained. Learned Tribunal also observed that the Insurance Company was trying to delay the case on one pretext or the other and in the circumstances aforesaid, the application was dismissed. Civil Revision 3357 of 1991 has thus been filed by the Insurance Company under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking quashment of the impugned order dated 17. 8. 1991.