Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company i.e. respondent No.3, argued that nothing was proved from the documents produced on record, especially because those were not taken in additional evidence and no opportunity was given to the Insurance Company to cross examine the person who brought the document. It was further contended that the documents were procured ones as the witness appearing on behalf of the firm before the Tribunal stated that the deceased had joined them on 01.10.2007 whereas the appointment letter was received by the deceased on 03.10.2007, which was clear from his signatures on Annexure A3. Also Annexure A5 shows the date of joining as 03.10.2007. The accident occurred on 11.10.2007. It was, therefore, not believable that the firm paid Rs.10,00,000/- as an ex-gratia payment to the family of the person who had worked with them only for 8 days. Also Annexure A6 does not show as to when the payment of Rs.10,00,000/- was made and by which mode. It simply says that it was full and final settlement. Nothing is shown that any cheque was received by widow of Lalit Mohan Gupta and the same was enchased.