On an appeal by the insurer regarding liability, the single-judge bench declined to admit fresh evidence citing a 20-year delay. The court held the insurer failed to discharge its burden of disproving the accident claim and confirmed the Tribunal's award.
Award of the Tribunal confirmed; Appeal by the insurance company dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
-1-
FAO No.1685 of 1994
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
FAO No.1685 of 1994 Date of Decision.04.03.2014
The United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
......Appellant
Versus
Maya Devi and others
......Respondents
Present: Mr. G.D. Gupta, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate for the respondents.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
-.-
K. KANNAN J.(ORAL)
Kamboj Pankaj Kumar 2014.03.06 14:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
-2-
FAO No.1685 of 1994
proof of violation of terms of policy is only on the insurer and the insurer cannot engage in private communications with DTO office as conclusively establishing that there was no valid driving licence. Even that apart if yet another copy of the driving licence was produced by the driver, it is the duty of the insurer to undertake an investigation and then secure evidence of whether there had been any other licence issued in favour of the driver from the DTO office at Delhi as claimed by the driver. The insurance company has not discharged the burden which was on it.
by the insurer is dismissed.
(K. KANNAN) JUDGE
March 04, 2014 Pankaj*
Kamboj Pankaj Kumar 2014.03.06 14:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the insurer discharged its burden of proving a violation of a policy term by 'private communications' with the DTO office.
Whether the appeal warranting the delay in production of evidence for over 20 years could be admitted.
Whether liability casts upon the insurer was correctly confirmed by the Tribunal.
The United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Maya Devi
K. KANNAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
