BHAGWAT PRASAD SHARMA & ANR vs SATISH KUMAR & ANR

Judgment text excerpt

$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 29th January, 2025 + MAC.APP. 149/2019, CM APPL. 3620/2019, CM APPL. 3622/2019 & CM APPL. 15971/2019 BHAGWAT PRASAD SHARMA & ANR .....Appellants Through: Mr. S.K. Tyagi, Adv. versus SATISH KUMAR & ANR .....Respondents Through: Ms. Archana Gaur, Ms. Ridhima Gaur & Ms. Ring Baliyaan, Advs. (through VC) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN AMIT MAHAJAN, J. (Oral) 1. The present appeal is filed challenging the award dated 20.09.2018 (hereafter ‘the impugned award’) passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts in MAC No. 2280/16. 2. The impugned award has been challenged on the ground that the appellant was, though holding a valid Insurance Policy of the offending vehicle, however, the liability has still been fastened on the appellant being the owner of the offending vehicle. 3. The defence raised by the Insurance Company that the insurance policy was cancelled on dishonour of the cheque which was issued at the time of issuance of policy, was accepted by the learned Tribunal and it was held that the responsibility for Signature Not Verified Signed By:HARMINDER MAC.APP. 149/2019 Page 1 of 4 KAUR Signing Date:03.02.2025 18:50:21 payment of compensation would rest on the owner/ driver of the offending vehicle. It was the case of the appellant that pursuant to dishonour of the cheque, the appellant had paid cash to one of the agents of the Insurance Company pursuant to which the cover note of the policy was issued. 4. The appellant relies upon the policy cover note which is annexed as Annexure A-3 of the present petition. It is contended that even though no date has been mentioned in the policy, the same was issued after the cash of ₹ 29,392/- was paid b