IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2705 of 2005 (O&M) Date of decision:23.09.2010 M/s The Oriental Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Paramjit Kaur and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Raj Kumar Bashamboo, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Avtar Singh Khinda, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? ---- K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The Insurance Company is in appeal challenging the liability on the ground that the vehicle had not been insured at all with the Insurance Company. At the trial, the parties went to trial on a plea by the insurer “that para No.15 of the petitionis replied as that the insurance particulars have not been supplied and in absence of the same the liability of the answering respondent is denied.” The counsel pleads this defence to mean that the vehicle had not been denied. 2. Evidently, the insurer has not stated in so many words that the vehicle was not insured but the denial has come about on a plea that the particulars given by the claimant are not adequate. However, at the FAO No.2705 of 2005 O&M) - 2 - trial, the RC book for the vehicle was produced and the copy was marked as R6 which showed that the chassis number and the engine number were respectively were 36688 and 34068. At the trial, the particulars tendered in the policy tallied with reference to the engine No.34068 but the chassis number was different and it was entered as 47471. The RC was again not produced by the owner but the insurer produced the RC that showed the registration number to be PB-18-F-5669. The discrepancies are not properly explained in evidence. I have not the benefit of the presence of the owner or the claimants to render assistance. They have not been shown up in spite of notice. Only the driver is present. The claimants cannot obtain any benefit merely securing the award against the driver. In view of the inadequate evidence, the award cannot, therefore, be sustained and it is set aside. The Tribunal will now issue notice to the claimants as well as the owner and allow for the parties to adduce evidence on the existence or otherwise of the policy of insurance for the offending vehicle against the insurer. The parties shall be at liberty to let in evidence as regards the same. The appeal is allowed and is remitted to the Tribunal. The Tribunal shall dispose of the case after due evidence in accordance with law. 3. For appearance of parties before the Tribunal on 08.11.2010. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 23.09.2010 sanjeev