IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. (1) F.A.O. No. 1295 of 1985 The National Insurance Co.Ltd. ....... Appellant through Mrs. Radhika Suri, Advocate. Versus Mangat Ram and others. ....... Respondents through Nemo. (2) F.A.O. No. 1296 of 1985 The National Insurance Co.Ltd. ....... Appellant through Mrs. Radhika Suri, Advocate. Versus Vinod Kumar and others. ....... Respondents through Nemo. Date of Decision: 30.10.2008 CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers 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? .... Mahesh Grover,J. This judgment will dispose of the above mentioned two appeals which, although have been preferred against different awards dated 14.3.1985 and 1.4.1985 passed in M.V.A. Case Nos. 82 of 15.6.1983/ F.A.O.No.1295 of 1985 -2- .... 23.1.1982 and 81 of 15.6.1983/ 12.10.1984, respectively, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridabad (for short, `the Tribunal'), yet, the same pertain to one motor vehicular accident which took place on 18.8.1991 causing death of one Mukesh and injuries to Vinod Kumar. The appellant-Insurance Company has pleaded that it could not have been fastened with the liability to pay compensation to the claimants as the impugned awards are ex parte and even if every thing is held against it, even then considering the cover note which was produced by the owner of the offending vehicle himself, the insurance of the vehicle had been taken out on 23.1.1982, whereas the accident in question had taken place on 18.8.1981. It has further been pleaded that there was no other evidence as the owner himself defaulted in appearance after initially appearing before the Tribunal and filing the written statement along with the insurance cover note. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and perusing the record, I am of the considered opinion that the appeals deserve to succeed. Even if it is held that ex parte proceedings were correctly taken against the appellant as it was served through publication, even then the owner of the offending vehicle, who appeared and filed his written statement along with the insurance cover note which showed that the vehicle in question was insured, the Tribunal was not precluded from taking judicial notice of the documents on record. It was the owner, who had appeared and produced the insurance cover note and, therefore, the F.A.O.No.1295 of 1985 -3- .... appellant was not liable to satisfy the impugned awards as the date of commencement of the insurance was 23.1.1982 whereas the accident had occurred on 18.8.1981. Accordingly, it is held that there was no valid insurance of the offending vehicle on the date of accident and, therefore, the appellant was absolved of its liability to satisfy the impugned awards. Rather, the driver and owner of the offending vehicle will be liable, jointly as well as severally, to satisfy the impugned awards in the given set of circumstances. In the result, the impugned awards are modified to the aforesaid extent and the appeals are allowed. October 30,2008 ( Mahesh Grover ) “SCM” Judge