: 1 : SD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.18336 OF 2006 FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.18336 OF 2006 FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.18336 OF 2006 WITH WITH WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.101 OF 2007 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.101 OF 2007 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.101 OF 2007 AND AND AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO.102 OF 2007 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.102 OF 2007 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.102 OF 2007 United India Insurance Co., Ratnagiri ...Appellant V/s. Jitendra Suresh Shinde & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.R.S. Dorandale, Advocate, for the Appellant. Mr.Rakesh R. Bhatkar, Advocate, for Respondent No.1. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. DATE : 25TH MARCH, 2008. DATE : 25TH MARCH, 2008. DATE : 25TH MARCH, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Advocate appearing for the appellant and Advocate for the 1st respondent. 2. The challenge in this Appeal is to the Judgment and Award dated 17th August, 2005 passed by the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Ratnagiri in a Claim Petition filed by the 1st respondent under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The 1st respondent/claimant who was driving an auto rickshaw was given a heavy dash by a luxury bus. As a result, he sustained injuries. : 2 : 3. A claim was filed for compensation on account of various injuries sustained by the 1st respondent. The appellant is the insurer of the luxury bus. The Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to negligence on the part of the driver of the luxury bus. Considering the evidence adduced regarding the nature of injuries sustained by the 1st respondent, the Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.53,862/- with interest at the rate of 7% p.a. The learned Advocate appearing for the applicant has placed reliance on averments made in Civil Application No.101 of 2007 and the documents annexed to the said Civil Application. He pointed out that though a policy of insurance was issued by the applicant, the cheque issued by the insured towards premium was dishonoured on 19th November, 2003. He pointed out that by a letter dated 19th November, 2003, the applicant gave an intimation about the dishonour of the cheque to the insured and informed the insured that the policy was cancelled. He pointed out that intimation was sent to the regional transport officer on the very day. It is submitted that as the accident occurred on 22nd February, 2004, the applicant was not liable to honour the Award which is made against the insured. : 3 : 4. Perusal of the impugned Judgment and Award shows that the aforesaid contention regarding dishonour of the cheque issued towards premium and consequent cancellation of the policy was never raised by the applicant before the Tribunal. The said case is sought to be made out for the first time in the year 2007 in this Appeal. The Award is only in the sum of Rs.53,862/-. It is too late in the day now to raise such a plea for the first time in this Appeal. 5. There is absolutely no explanation whatsoever as to why the said plea was not raised before the Tribunal and as to why no attempt was made earlier to produce the documents which are annexed to the aforesaid Civil Application. Hence, no case is made out for granting permission to lead additional evidence. There is no foundation for the said plea in the written statement of the appellant and that there is no explanation for belatedly producing the said documents. 6. There is no other contention raised in the Appeal. Hence, I pass following order :- "O R D E R" "O R D E R" "O R D E R" : 4 : (a). First Appeal No.100 of 2007 is dismissed with no orders as to costs. (b). Civil Application No.101 of 2007 is rejected for the reasons recorded in the Judgment. (c). Civil Application No.102 of 2007 does not survive in view of disposal of the Appeal. [ABHAY S. OKA, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.]