N.I.a.Co.Ltd. v. K.Saimma

AHO No. 53 of 1999

1. 15.05.2018

The short point argued by learned counsel for the

appellant is that the liability of the Insurance Company vis-à-vis the passenger of a bus would be limited to Rs.15,000/- as the policy was issued under the Old Act. While dealing with such issue, the learned Single Judge has found that the liability of the Insurance Company was unlimited, for which extra premium had been paid. While dismissing the appeal of the appellant, the learned Single Judge has in para-7, held as under:

“7. The learned counsels for the claimantrespondents and the owner had also submitted that adverse inference should be drawn against the Insurance Company for non-production of the entire policy along with all endorsements. In this connection, the learned counsels have placed reliance upon several decisions of the Supreme Court as well as of this Court. It has been submitted that the assertions of the owner and the claimants that policy had been issued with unlimited liability by accepting the extra premium had not been specifically denied by the Insurance Company and the Insurance Company did not produce the entire policy including the endorsement to counter such a plea and as such, it should be held that unlimited liability has been undertaken by the Insurance Company. However, in view of the principle already discussed, it is not necessary to delve into this question.”

Such finding of fact having been arrived at by the

learned Single Judge, we find no reason to differ with the same.

-2-