* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI MACANo.403/2010 Date of Decision; Tulv 12. 2010 ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Appellant through Ms. Manjusha Wadhwa, Advocate versus HAMIDA BEGUM & ORS Respondents through None r. CORAM: V HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE REKHA SHARMA 1. Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the 'Digest'? REKHA SHARMA. T. (ORAL) The only grievance raised in this appeal by the Insurance Company is that the Claims Tribunal while saddling the Insurance Company with the liability to pay compensation has not taken into account the fact that the Insurance Company had issued notices under Order 12 Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter called the Code) to the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle but in response to the same, no driving licence was produced in the Court and yet the Tribunal has held the Insurance Company liable. On a perusal of the impugned award, I find that except for issuing notices under Order 12 Rule 8 of the Code to the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle, the Insurance Company took no MACA No.403/2010 Page 1 of 3 I Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified further steps to make good its submission that the vehicle in question was, in fact, being driven by the driver without holding a vahd driving licence. The Tribunal has referred to the statement of the Investigating Officer who had appeared as CW.l and thereby he had stated that, "he was the lO in FIR No.602/02 and he has filed the charge sheet after investigation. He had talien into possession an endorsement of driving license of Rl. The said endorsement was pertaining to the challan chit bearing number 058243 dated 11.12.2002. As per this challan chit, driving license of Rl was valid upto 16.8.2004 and accused was having no driving license at the time of accident and same was seized in a challan chit but the same was valid." Having regard to the aforesaid testimony of the Investigating Officer, it has been held by the Claims Tribunal that it was for the Insurance Company to have taken all available steps to get the challan chit verified and collect the particulars of the driving license. The Tribunal has further held that the Insurance Company neither made / any efforts to summon the driver and the owner as its witnesses, nor made any effort to find out the whereabouts of the challan chit and the particulars of the driving license with the help of the challan chit. In view of what have been noticed above, I find no infirmity in the order of the Claims Tribunal. On the mere fact that the Insurance Company had issued notices under Order 12 Rule 8 of the Code to the owner and the driver, it cannot be allowed to contend that it had discharged its onus of proving that the offending vehicle was being driven without a valid hcence. MACA No.403/2010 Page 2 of 3 There is no merit in the appeal. The same is dismissed. However, the Insurance Company is granted four weeks to deposit the awarded amount. C.M. No.11932/2010 This is an application by the appellant under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking exemption from filing certified and typed copies of certain annexures. The application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. I RE] \r* KHASSHARMA, J. JULY 12, 2010 1^ , .—/!y, /0 MACA No.403/2010 Page 3 of 3