U.I.Ins.Co.Ltd vs Smt.Sugni Devi & Ors on 24 August, 2012
Learned counsel for the respondents-caveator,
however, pointed out that the site plan was prepared after
many days of the occurrence. The witnesses who signed the
document, i.e., Suresh and Ashok deposed that their
signatures were taken on blank paper. As such, the said site
plan cannot be relied upon. Moreover, AW 1 Shri Sumer
Singh appeared as eye witness. No other eye witness was
produced by the respondents. There is no rebuttal evidence.
The Insurance Company, therefore, could not prove any
contributory negligence. Reliance was placed on the
judgment rendered by the Division Bench of the Karnataka
High Court in Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation
v. Kumudavalli and Others, reported in 2005 ACJ 1598 to
state that in the absence of any material on record, no
deduction with respect to the receipt of the family pension,
if any, can be made.