United India Insurance Company Ltd v. Kumari Foram Parekh & Ors.

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. V.P. Mathur, Counsel for the Petitioner Both the petitions since arise from a common order dated 14.12.2011 are disposed of by the present order. Instant petitions have been filed by the petitioner insurance-company assailing the order dated 14.12.2011 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge [Fast Track] No.7 Jaipur Metro, Jaipur rejecting application filed under order 16 Rule 1 and 6 C.P.C., read with Section 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for summoning the relevant record from the Office of the D.T.O. Amritsar along with the representative for the verification of driving license produced of the driver of the offending vehicle by the claimants which was placed on record before the learned Tribunal. It has come on record that at one stage an ex-parte award was passed by the learned Tribunal against the owner and driver of the offending vehicle, the respondent No.6.

2 CWPs. 2832 & 2846/2012 The respondent No.6 filed application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. for setting aside ex- parte award which was allowed and opportunity has been afforded to the parties to lead the evidence in respect of their defence. The driving license of the driver of the offending vehicle placed on record shows that he was holding the valid driving license to drive Heavy Motor Vehicles. A report was also submitted by the petitioner through their Counsel obtained from the Office of D.T.O. Amritsar, copy of which has been placed on record, Annexure-12 regarding verification of D/L No.11524, which opines that his driving license bearing No.11524/.DTO/Asr, was issued on 28th October, 1994 for Heavy Transport Vehicles only. Counsel for petitioner submits that application was submitted before the learned Tribunal for summoning the record of D.T.O. Amritsar to examine the veracity of the driving license of H.T.V. since such licenses are renewed for three years under Section 14 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

As such it is to be examined as to whether driver of the offending vehicle was holding a valid license on the date of incident and the verification is possible only if the relevant record is summoned from 3 CWPs. 2832 & 2846/2012 the Office of D.T.O. Amritsar along with the representative. Counsel for petitioner submits that the license for H.T.V. issued on 28th October, 1994 and was renewable for three years and petitioner has a bonafide apprehension that renewal of H.T.V. license for a period of 10- years appears to be fake and fabricated and that cannot be relied upon and permission if not granted to the petitioner for summoning of the record from the Office of the D.T.O. Amritsar that may cause prejudice for sustaining their defence before the learned Tribunal. Sufficient material was already on record and the driving license of the driver of offending vehicle is also on record and the petitioner got it verified from their own sources and certificate has been placed on record and that also discloses that the driving license for Heavy Transport Vehicles was issued from the Office of D.T.O. Amritsar on 28th October, 1994 and if the petitioner still has any apprehension regarding renewable of the driving license, they are always at liberty to obtain further information from the Office of D.T.O. Amritsar, but that could not be a reason to summon representative from the Office of 4 CWPs.