The Division/ Branch Manager Vs Smt Suman Kumari Saxena and 2 Others

2. By the aforesaid order a direction was given to the petitioner / United India Insurance Company Ltd., Kuber to make the payment of Rs.54,547/- to the claimant. In the absence of the same, claimant become entitled for the interest @ 7% p.a. from the date of judgment.

¶13

3. The only argument has been raised as stated in paragraph-13 of the petition that the petitionerInsurance Company filed his written statement wherein it is specially mentioned in the additional pleas that the husband of complainant was not entitled for reimbursement on expenditure incurred as he was neither the policy holder nor beneficiary under the policy.

¶14

WRIC No. 18555 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

4. While going through the award passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, the Court is prima facie satisfied that this aspect of the matter has already been dealt with and after dealing with the terms and conditions of the policy which has been quoted as internal page-7 of the aforesaid judgment.

¶17

5. Nothing has been stated in the entire writ petition that how and in what manner the judgment delivered by the Permanent Lok Adalat is bad in the eyes of law.

¶18

6. Apart from the same, from perusal of the facts as narrated above, it is clear that the petitioner/Union India Insurance Co. Ltd. has been filing the petitions against the poor litigant for pity amount. Aforesaid practice has been deprecated by this Court as well as Hon'ble Supreme Court from time to time.

¶19

7. The same view was taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Haryana Dairy Development Cooperative Federation Limited Vs. Jagdish Lal reported in (2014) 3 SCC 156. Again the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Subrata Roy Sahara Vs. Union of India reported in (2014) 8 SCC 470 has taken the same view observing that the Indian judicial system is grossly afflicted, with frivolous litigation. Ways and means need to be evolved, to deter litigants from their compulsive obsession, towards senseless and ill-considered claims. One needs to keep in mind, that in the process of litigation, there is an innocent sufferer on the other side, of every irresponsible and senseless claim. He suffers long drawn anxious periods of nervousness and restlessness, whilst the litigation is pending, without any fault on his part. The paragraph 150 of the aforesaid judgement reads as follows:-

¶20

WRIC No. 18555 of 2025

¶21

3

¶22

"150. The Indian judicial system is grossly afflicted, with frivolous litigation. Ways and means need to be evolved, to deter litigants from their compulsive obsession, towards senseless and ill-considered claims. One needs to keep in mind, that in the process of litigation, there is an innocent sufferer on the other side, of every irresponsible and senseless claim. He suffers long drawn anxious periods of nervousness and restlessness, whilst the litigation is pending, without any fault on his part."

¶23

8. From perusal of the averments made in the petition and considering the fees of lawyer, this Court is of the opinion that the cost of filing of the present petition is more than the awarded amount.

¶24

9. As prayed by learned counsel for the petitioner, a weeks time is granted to seek the Instructions in the matter.

¶25

10. Put up this matter as fresh on 16.07.2025. "

¶26

Today when the matter is taken-up, it is informed by Sri Vipul Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner that after filing of the writ petition, a decision has been taken by the petitioner to make the payment of amount as awarded by the Permanent Lok Adalat. It is further argued that the amount awarded by the Permanent Lok Adalat along with interest i.e. a sum of Rs.56,435/- has already been deposited by the petitioner with the Permanent Lok Adalat.

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶28

From perusal of the record it transpires that pursuant to the order passed by this Court dated 04.07.2025 as quoted above, the amount as awarded by the Permanent Lok Adalat has already been deposited by the petitioner.

¶29

In this view of the matter, the Permanent Lok Adalat,

¶30

WRIC No. 18555 of 2025

¶31

4

¶32

Aligarh is directed to release the aforesaid amount in favour of respondent no.1- Smt. Suman Kumar Saxena after verifying its credentials, without asking any security within a period of three weeks.

¶33

In view of the above, no further order is required to be passed.

¶34

Accordingly, the present present petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.

¶35

Registrar (Compliance) is further directed to communicate a copy of this order to Smt. Suman Kumar Saxena, R/o 19/29, New Gopalpuri, Sasni Gate Aligarh, through CJM Aligarh, within a week.

¶36

September 18, 2025 S.K.

¶37

(Prakash Padia,J.)

¶38

Digitally signed by :- SWEETY KANOJIA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

The Division/ Branch Manager v. Smt Suman Kumari Saxena and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Division/ Branch Manager v. Smt Suman Kumari Saxena and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases