RANJIT SINGH Vs. POOJA MADAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment will dispsoe F. A. O. Nos. 1112 and 1113 of 1987. M/s Sewak Tourist Bus Service, a Partnership concern and its partner Ranjit Singh have come up in appeal against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, dated July 27, 1989.

(2.) THERE is no dispute about the facts. The appellants have not disputed the accident or the manner in which it has taken place. They have also not questioned the quantum of compensation awarded to the claimants. Their learned counsel has only made two submissions, namely, (i) the Tribunal ought to have held that the entire compensation amount was payable by the Insurance Company, (ii) alternatively the Insurance Company admitted its liability to the extent of Rs. 1,50,000/- in the written statement. Admission in the pleadings amount to estoppel and the Tribunal ought to have held that the Insurance Company is liable to the extent of Rs. 1,50,000/-, the liability which was admitted in the written statement.

(3.) LEARNED counsel submitted that the Insurance policy was not proved according to law. The counsel for the Insurance Company tendered a duplicate copy of the Insurance Policy and it was admitted into evidence. Although the objection to the mode of proof was raised at the trial but the Tribunal after rejecting it admitted the document in evidence. In the circumstances of the case, I do not think that this objection is available to the owners of the vehicle. The original policy was with them and in order to sustain the plea that the liability of the Insurance Company was unlimited, they ought to have produced and proved it.