Blog

Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to recall of witness power to be invoked to meet the ends of justice for strong and valid reasons with cautions and circumspection, and the same issue was held in the judgement passed by a division bench judge Hon’ble Mrs Sunita Agarwal, J. Hon’ble Krishan Pahal, J. In the matter – Dr Anoop Kumar Bhattacharya And Another V/s National Insurance Co. Ltd. [- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. – 1652 of 2009]

While Sri Amit Manohar, learned counsel, has put in an appearance on behalf of respondent no.1 the Insurance Company (hereinafter referred to as ‘Insurer’), no one has appeared on behalf of respondent no.2, the owner of the truck involved in the accident (hereinafter referred to as ‘offending truck’) despite service of notice.

Issue No.-4 entailed determination on the point if the offending truck was under insurance by the Insurer at the time of the accident and if 7 it was being driven in violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The Tribunal examined the insurance policy document and found that the offending truck was insured by the Insurer for the period from 03.06.2004 to 02.06.2005 and, thus, the Insurance policy was alive when the accident took place on 20.07.2004. The Tribunal also found that there was nothing on record to indicate that the offending truck was being driven in violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy when the accident occurred. 16. Issue No.5 concerning compensation.

The court perused the facts and arguments presented in the case f the opinion that the facts of the case warrant that the order of the Tribunal as to interest be modified so as to direct payment of interest from the date of institution of the claim petition instead of from the date of the disposal of the claim petition.

Click here to read the judgment

Judgment reviewed by Sakshi Mishra