1 ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.1045 OF 1996 The New India Assurance Co.Ltd. ...Appellant vs. 1 Tejanath Ganpat Gujar 2 Sou Kamal Tejanath Gujar 3 Mohammad Abdul Aziz Ismail 4 Sayyed Sadik Sayyad Basha Sayyed 5 Shivaji Vishnu Nanaware ...Respondents Mr.S.R.Singh for the appellant Mr.Avinash M.Gokhale i/b Mr.V.A.Shastry for respondent nos.1 and 2 CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : MAY 7, 2010 JUDGMENT: 1 The learned counsel for the 1st and 2nd respondents has tendered on record a certified copy of the list of documents at Exh.43 in M.A.C. Application No. 96 of 1987. As the certified copy is placed on record, it is not necessary to wait for the record of the said claim petition no.96 of 1987. 2 The challenge in this appeal by the appellant- insurer is to the Award made in the claim petition under section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The only ground of challenge is that there is no evidence on record to show that the offending vehicle was not insured with the appellant on the date of the accident. The learned counsel for the Appellant pointed out that a photo copy of the letter issued by R.T.O.Banglore placed on record which states that the truck in question was insured with the appellant on the relevant date. He 2 submitted that the original letter is not produced and proved and therefore, on the basis of a photo copy of the letter, the finding on issue no.3 could not have been recorded against the appellant. 3 On the last date of hearing, the learned counsel for the 1st and 2nd respondents pointed out that there were two claim petitions filed arising out of the same accident and in companion claim petition no.96 of 1987, the original of the said letter received by the R.T.O.,Banglore was produced on record. Therefore, this Court had called for the record of the said disposed of claim petition. Though the record is not received, the learned counsel for the 1st and 2nd respondents-claimants pointed out that in the companion petition, the original letter was produced on record along with the list at Exh. 43 and the Advocate appearing for the insurer i.e the appellant herein has given no objection for exhibiting the said document and accordingly the said letter was exhibited at Exh.46. A certified copy of the list of documents at Exhibit-43 is taken on record. Incidentally, it must be noted that an appeal was preferred by the appellant against the Award passed in the said companion petition. The said appeal being First Appeal no.777 of 2001 has been dismissed for non prosecution under order dated 8th February 2002. 4 As the original of the letter issued by the R.T.O.,Banglore was produced in the companion claim petition and the same was marked as exhibit by consent of the appellant, the contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant cannot be accepted. There is no merit in the appeal. Appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. 3 5 If any amount deposited by the appellant is pending in this Court, the said amount along with interest accrued thereon shall be transferred to the tribunal. The tribunal will pass an appropriate order regarding disbursement or withdrawal of the said amount after hearing the parties. Record and Proceedings of the companion claim petition no.96 of 1987, if received, be sent back. JUDGE