NAND LAL Vs. MANOHAR LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this application, the respondent No.2/insurance company seeks to place on record Policy Schedule (Annexure A-1) and terms and conditions of the policy (Annexure A-2). It is stated in the application that during evidence before learned Tribunal below, incorrect terms and conditions of policy (Exhibit RW-1/B) were exhibited, which, in fact, were of 'comprehensive policy' and not of 'Act Policy'.

(2.) Respondents/appellants have filed reply to the said application stating therein that respondent No.2 has not challenged the award and as such, application is not maintainable, Order 41 rule 27 CPC, vests right with the appellant to place on record additional documents/evidence. Respondents/appellants have also stated that the application has been filed at a belated stage, i.e. at the stage of arguments. For comparison, the appellants have annexed Annexure R- 1/A, which is a private car package policy, to show that no extra premium was deducted to cover third party liability and only basic premium qua third party cover has been charged. It has been denied that while tendering Exhibit RW-1/B, the concerned officer of the insurance company, wrongly tendered policy/terms and conditions of a package policy.

(3.) Though the application at hand has been resisted by tooth and nail by the respondents/appellants, on aforesaid grounds, but keeping in view the controversy involved in the appeal, this court deems it fit to take on record the documents Annexures A-1 and A-2, as they would help this court adjudicate the controversy in an effective manner.