NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY Vs. ANJU DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common order both the petitions are being disposed of together.

(2.) In the two applications filed under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in the two cases, the petitioner -insurer prayed before the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Shimla that it be granted permission to contest the claim petition on all grounds which are available to the insured in addition to the statutory defences also available to it in accordance with law. The necessary and relevant averment in support of the aforesaid prayer of the petitioner is contained in para 3 of the applications which I reproduce here -in -below, for ready reference: - "That even otherwise also the insured has failed to intimate the factum of accident in writing to the replying respondent although the insurance policy enjoins upon the insured to intimate every happening whereby the liability might come upon the insurance company, in writing to the insurance company. Neither the claimant have supplied the insurance company with age, income nor has accidental proof nor the insured has supplied or furnished the Driving licence details of the driver who was driving the vehicle at the time of accident. As such there is a reasonable apprehension that the claimant might collude with the insured in order to claim higher compensation and the insured may not contest the proceedings diligently. On this ground also the permission to contest the proceedings on all grounds may be granted to the replying respondent."

(3.) The learned Tribunal rejected the petitioners aforesaid applications vide the impugned order dated 15th January, 2007 which reads thus: - "Arguments heard on application under Section 170 of the M.V. Act. There is no material before me suggesting the collusion between the petitioners and the owner of the vehicle. Hence, this application is hereby dismissed. 3 PWs examined. Remaining PWs be produced on 22.3.2007."