Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2016 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (2) TMI 1374 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURTDenial of indemnity and a provision for recovery granted to the insurer - seeking for enhancement - HELD THAT:- At the Appellate Court, the owner has filed an application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC that has elicited through RTI a response to say the licence number had been wrongly given as 18690/Ag/2003 when it was actually 16690/Ag/ 2003 and that it had been issued in the name of Balkar Singh. A response through RTI is of a public officer and it is a public document and would require no further corroboration in the manner contemplated under Section 77 of the Evidence Act. The document must be taken to be true of what its recitals state. The certified copy of the licence issued also shows that the licence had been renewed at the DTO Office at Mansa on 26.08.2008, which was valid up to 19.09.2011. This also shows that the driver had a valid driving licence at the relevant time. The additional evidence is relevant and important to decide that the owner and driver were entitled to full indemnity. The award denying indemnity and providing for a right of recovery against for the insurer is set aside. The appeals filed by the owner and driver are allowed - The amount deposited by the owner and driver at the time of preferring the appeals are ordered to be returned to the owner.
|