IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA NO.53 OF 2005 BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BRANCH OFFICE AT RAJENDRA NAGAR, NAWADAH VERSUS 1. RANJU DEVI, WIFE OF LATE NARENDRA KUMAR SINGH @ GUDDU 2. TIMSI, MINOR DAUGHTER OF LATE NARENDRA KUMAR SINGH, UNDER THE GUARDIANSHIP OF THEIR MOTHER RANJU DEVI 3. MASOMAT SUSHILA DEVI, WIDOW OF LATE LALO SINGH AND MOTHER OF LATE NARENDRA KUMAR SINGH ALL ARE RESIDENT OF MOHALLA GARH PER, NAWADA, P.O. & P.S. NAWADAH, DISTRICT NAWADAH ……….. …………………RESPONDENTS ******* 22 09.02.2009 Heard Counsel appearing for the appellant and the Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. This appeal has been filed against the order and judgment of the Tribunal, Nawadah (3rd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nawadah). The short facts are that the appellant is said to has taken an insurance and for that purpose he had signed a cover note on 01.03.2004. The said cover note is numbered as 553067. Subsequently, the Insurance Company cancelled that cover note as it has been alleged that the premium of the insurance amount was not paid. The Insurance Company thereafter issued the insurance policy to the respondents treating the insurance from the date of the payment i.e. 09.03.2004. The submission of the Insurance Company is that subsequently the cover note issued on 01.03.2004 - 2 - was cancelled due to non-payment of the premium amount and the respondents are trying to take advantage of the cover note issued on 01.03.2004 since in the mean time the vehicle met with an accident resulting into the death of one person. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents seriously disputes the fact that infact the cover note has been cancelled and the money has not been paid on 09.03.2004. It is the case of the respondents that the Insurance Company in order to avoid their liability has prepared the insurance paper on 09.03.2004 although they had received the money much earlier. It is further submitted on behalf of the respondents that the agent had not deposited the money and respondents could not be blame for any default on behalf of the agent. On the other hand, Counsel appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company submits that the money receipts etc. are in his possession which could show that infact the claimants had deposited the money on 09.03.2004. All these documents are not part of the records and, therefore, it would be proper for the Court below to re-examine the matter on receipt of this order. The parties are directed to appear before the Court below within one month from today and the Court below will - 3 - dispose of the case within three months thereafter without giving unnecessary time to either of the parties. In the result, this appeal is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )