9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 1374X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alkar 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 b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel for the insurer seeks to contend that it was the case of head on collision and, therefore, the driver of the motorcycle must be taken as having contributed to the accident. The Tribunal has already found the truck driver to be responsible. There is not even an appeal filed by the insurer. The thrust of argument by the counsel appearing on behalf of the owner was not to deny the negligence itself but only plead for a right of indemnity, as per the terms of the policy and the proof which he was trying to adduce with respect to the validity of the driving licence. 3. I will therefore discard and argument raised placing reliance on a judgment of this Court in Rajinder Puri vs. Sandeep Singh (minor) and others 2014 (3) PLR Page 625 that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aughter Fatal Accident Date of accident Heads of claim Tribunal High Court Sr. No. Amount (`) Amount (`) 1 Income 2500 4500 2 Add, % of increase 3 Deduction 4 Multiplicand (annualised) 30000 54000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pensation. The counsel argues 1/3rd deduction must be taken because he was not a bachelor. If he was literally treated as a bachelor and the wife had not even joined, it was perfectly competent for the court to treat him as bachelor and provide for compensation, taking 50% deduction. I will also find no scope for enhancement of notional income what has been assessed at ₹ 5200/-. I will re-work the compensation and tabulate various heads as under: Fatal Accident Date of accident Age 22 31.08.2011 Occupation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of compensation shall be ₹ 6,91,600/- which shall be distributed equally amongst the claimants. The additional amount shall also attract interest at the rate of 9% from the date of petition till payment. 8. In the two appeals bearing FAO No. 2705 and 2838 of 2013 filed by the owner, the most crucial issue is, whether the driver had a valid driving licence. He did not join at the time of trial and there was evidence brought through a person from the DTO Office at Agra, which originally had issued the licence making reference to the licence No. as 18690 of 2003 and making a verification to say that it had not been issued in the name of Balkar Singh, who was the driver. At the Appellate Court, the owner has filed an application under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
