- (1.) Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. has challenged the order passed by the high Court in which direction is issued to the appellant to pay the entire compensation to the injured. It holds that the policy was comprehensive with no limitation to the third party. The submission on behalf of the appellant is that its statutory liability is limited to the extent of Rs 50,000 and any finding over and above that is to be set aside.
(2.) The appellant issued insurance policy, the Commercial Vehicle (Comprehensive) Policy for which it charged Rs 125 as premium towards third-party risk, in terms of Section 95 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The said vehicle later was transferred in the name of Respondents 2 and 3. The incident is said to have taken place on 18-3-1982 at about 10. 15 a. m. When Respondent 4 was driving his motorcycle on Ring Road, when he reached hot mix plant a truck dashed against his motorcycle causing injury, for which he submitted his claim of rupees ten lakhs. The Tribunal awarded rupees one lakh sixty thousand and further recorded the following finding: "In the first instance I find that the policy appears to be a comprehensive policy as it is mentioned at the top of this document. . Under the circumstances, I hold that the Insurance Company has not produced the insurance policy in accordance with the law and so I hold that the Insurance Company is liable to pay the entire amount of compensation to the petitioner under the law and it cannot be said that the liability of the Insurance Company is limited up to Rs 50,000 only. "
(3.) Aggrieved by this, the appellant filed an appeal before the High Court. The High Court also dismissed the appeal by holding that the policy was a comprehensive policy and the liability of the Insurance Company was unlimited. The reason for disbelieving the appellant was that the copy which was produced was held not to be the carbon copy of the policy as it was signed by one Mr K. K. Anand, ADM. The Court records on the basis of his personal knowledge that there is no ADM by that name in Delhi and even if there was any, he knows that none worked as Branch Manager of this insurance Company. Hence, the Court disbelieved the carbon copy and held that the insurance policy was comprehensive and the appellant's liability was unlimited.;