This appeal is preferred by the appellant-insurance company, who is the second respondent before the Court below, assailing the judgment of the IV Additional District Judge, Kurnool in OP.No.942 of 2004 dated 23.11.2006 on the grounds that the Court below grossly erred in disbelieving that the insurer has not given notice to the owner and RTA owing to the dishonour of premium cheque, where, in fact, the appellant has given notice as per rules and regulations; the Court below erred in disbelieving the evidence placed by the appellant with regard to proof of cancellation of the policy and intimation of the same to the owner of the vehicle.

2. Heard both the counsel.

3. The facts of the case, to the extent necessary, are that the first respondent in the Court below paid premium for the policy by way of cheque dated 17.09.2003 and later, when the appellant sent the cheque for collection, the same was dishonoured on ground of insufficient funds. As soon as the intimation was received from the concerned branch, a letter was addressed to the insured by the insurer about the bouncing of the cheque issued towards premium and cancellation of policy, since the cheque could not be honou