Court No. - 26
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER DEFECTIVE No. - 12 of 2006
Appellant :- The Oriental Insurance Company Limited
Respondent :- Giridhari Lal & Others Counsel for Appellant :- Vivek Kumar Birla Counsel for Respondent :- P.K.Singh
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Order on Delay Condonation Application No. 4646 of 2006.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
The appeal is reported to be beyond time by 249 days.
I have perused the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application.
The cause shown in the affidavit for filing the appeal beyond time is bona-fide.
The delay in filing the appeal is condoned and the appeal shall be treated to have been filed in time.
The Delay Condonation Application No. 4646 of 2006 is allowed.
Order on Appeal The present appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 31.1.2005 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ District Judge, Chandauli, whereby the Tribunal has awarded Rs.5,25,000/- along-with 6% interest as compensation to the claimants-respondents for the death of one K.P. Pandit, who met with an accident with Maruti Car No. D.L.3C.M. -8543 and died on 7.5.2002.
Learned counsel for the appellant, while challenging the order of the Tribunal has contended that the maruti car was not insured on the date of the accident inasmuch as, the policy which was filed by the claimant was forged policy and, as such, the finding of the Tribunal holding that the offending vehicle was insured on the date of the accident is illegal and not sustainable in law. He further contends that the Tribunal has not recorded any finding on the issue of driving license, though, specific plea has been raised by the appellant in the written statement contending therein that the liability of the insurance company is subject to the vehicle being driven by a person holding a valid driving license.
Be that as it may, the contention of the counsel for the appellant that the policy filed by the claimant is forged document cannot be accepted in appeal inasmuch as, the Court below, on the basis of admission by the counsel for the insurance company that the vehicle in question was insured with the insurance- company, recorded the finding that the vehicle was insured on the date of the accident. The plea of fraud was not set-up by the insurance-company before the Court below, there is nothing on record to indicate that the policy filed by the claimant is forged document. Thus, the finding of the Tribunal that the vehicle was not insured on the date of the accident is correct and is based on proper appreciation of facts on record and is not liable to be interfered with in appeal.
With respect to other contention raised by the appellant regarding driving license of the driver of the offending vehicle, it was duty of the insurance company to get issue in respect of validity of driving license of the driver of maruti car framed. Since, the insurance company has not raised the said point before the Tribunal, the same cannot be permitted to be agitated in appeal.
Thus, for the reasons given above, the appeal lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 29.11.2018 Ishan