Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

On issue No. 3, the insurance company has led evidence by examining RW-2 Ankit Jalan, Sr. Executive, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Com. Ltd, who vide his affidavit Ex.RW2/A has stated that respondent No. 1 was holding driving licence issued by RTO Patna and the same was found invalid upon verification. Further respondent No. 1 has also produced on record driving licence issued by DTO, Phek, Nagaland. During cross-examination, Ankit Jalan has admitted that he cannot say whether document Ex.R1 is valid or not and till date he did not receive any kind of document/report regarding invalidity of the document Ex.R1. Further admitted that as per document Ex.R6, the licence of respondent No. 1 was valid for auto rikshaw only which was issued by RTO Patna. He further stated that he did not know whether in Bihar, separate licence for non-electronic vehicle and electronic vehicle are issued by the authority and he also did not know that in Bihar, auto rikshaw comes under the pool of non-electronic vehicle.

The insurance company has further examined RW2 (inadvertently repeated) Nilesh Bairwa, Senior Executive Legal, Bajaj 3 of 11 General Insurance Company Ltd., who tendered in evidence Ex.R-10 (wrongly numbered) driving licence verification report issued by DTO, PHEK, Nagaland in RTI, Ex.R-11 envelope in which said report Ex.R-10 received. As per Ex.R-10 driving licence No. 53059/PHEK was found fake. He further admitted that they did not receive any record from Nagaland authority except the verification report Ex.R-10 and that they did not summon any person from the Nagaland authority. He further admitted that it is not in the verification report in whose name license no.53059/PHEK was issued.