UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. TARA CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TWO contentions are raised by the learned counsel for the appellant Insurance Company. First, that the vehicle was not insured at the time of the actual accident. He submitted that the cover note shows that the period was commencing from 1. 00 p. m. of 31. 3. 92 and actual incident took place at about 12. 00 p. m. on that day. This point was not specifically argued before the learned Tribunal. Learned counsel has shown a copy of the cover note from his record. Original one is not produced before the Tribunal. Therefore, carbon copy cannot be looked into. Apart from that the copy of the cover note shows that the period of insurance commenced from 1. 00 p. m. of 31. 3. 92 which ends on 30. 3. 93 at mid night hours. It is not in dispute that the insurance was taken for one year. Therefore, the Insurance Company cannot plead that it starts from 1. 00 p. m. on 31. 3. 92, and if it ends at 12. 00 mid night of 31. 3. 93 then it starts from 12 mid night of 31. 3. 92 and not from 1. 00 p. m. of 31. 3. 92. Hence this contention is rejected.

(2.) THE learned counsel then submitted that there was no valid licence of the driver who was driving the bus in question. It is not in dispute that the driver was having valid licence for medium vehicle. Whether the bus in question was a medium vehicle or heavy vehicle is a question of fact. No. evidence was led before the learned Tribunal. It was never argued before the Tribunal in that sense. THErefore, this contention cannot be permitted to be raised in this appeal. Hence this contention is also rejected.