NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. Vs. BACHNO DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) While riding Scooter bearing registration no. JK02H-9658 as a pillion rider, Roshan Lal was hit by the offending vehicle bearing registration no. JK02Q-826, which resulted in his death. The offending vehicle was being driven in rash and negligent manner which hit the scooter on which the deceased was traveling as a pillion rider. Claim petition was filed before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Jammu. The Tribunal, on the basis of the pleadings of the parties framed four issues and after recording its findings, awarded compensation of Rs. 3,91,000 with 7.5% simple interest from the date of filing of the claim petition. The award also apportioned the compensation to be paid to the three claimants who had filed the claim petition. Feeling aggrieved of the award the present appeal has been filed.

(2.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Appellant has questioned the award on the ground that no opportunity was given to it to prove its case before the Tribunal. It is stated that a specific plea raised by them was that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid driving license at the time of the accident, as such, it had no liability to indemnify the insured. It is contended that even issue in this regard was framed by the Tribunal and appellant had placed on record original verification report issued by the licensing authority Hyderabad. The witnesses, who were in possession of the record, were summoned but they refused to appear despite summons having been issued to them. An application was filed for examination of these witnesses on interrogatories but after obtaining objections from the otherside no order was passed on the said application. This, in nut shell, is the controversy raised in this appeal.

(3.) The first contention raised by the appellant regarding nonserving of interrogatories on the concerned clerk of the Licensing Authority Hyderabad for verification of the driving license, has to be examined in the context as to whether such an application was filed in accordance with the provisions of Order 26 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure.