Dismissed

Elsemewar Tirkey v. Chandradev Yadav

Chhattisgarh HC11 Mar 2024WP227/150/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order allowing the impleadment of the petitioner as a party in Motor Accident Claims Tribunal proceedings. The petitioner, father and husband of the deceased driver and vehicle owner, argued he should not be impleaded as he did not own or drive the vehicle. The court declined interference but granted liberty to raise grounds before the execut

What the court decided

AI extract

Elsemewar Tirkey Vs Chandradev Yadav — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

1 (WP227 No.150 of 2024)

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WP227 No. 150 of 2024

¶4

Elsemewar Tirkey S/o Brijmohan Tirkey Aged About 64 Years R/o Village Vandna Post Office Kot, P.S. Sitapur, Tahsil Rajapur, District- Sarguja, Chhattisgarh.

¶5

---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Chandradev Yadav S/o Bechu Yadav Aged About 70 Years R/o Village Keshara, P.S. Kamleshwarpur, Tahsil Sitapur, District- Sarguja, Chhattisgarh.

¶8

Omprkash Yadav S/o Chandradev Yadav Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Keshara, P.S. Kamleshwarpur, Tahsil Sitapur, District- Sarguja, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Respondents

¶10

(Cause-title taken from the Case Information System)

¶11

For Petitioner :- Mr. Vinod Kumar Tekam, Counsel

¶12

SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board

¶13

12.03.2024

¶14

1. Heard.

¶15

2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner questioning the impugned order dated 04.10.2023 (Annexure P1), passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Ambikapur, District Surguja, C.G. (for short the “tribunal”), whereby an application filed by the respondents herein for impleading the name of the petitioner- Elsemewar Tirkey as a party/non-applicant, being the sole legal representative of Kanak Kumar Tirkey (driver) and Salomani (owner of the vehicle), has been allowed.

¶16

2 (WP227 No.150 of 2024)

¶17

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner herein is the father and husband of Kanak Kumar Tirkey (driver) and Salomani (owner of the vehicle) respectively, but he is neither the owner of the vehicle nor the driver of the same at the time when alleged accident took place. Therefore, he cannot be impleaded as a party/non-applicant before the tribunal/executing Court. Hence, the impugned order dated 04.10.2023 is liable to be set aside.

¶18

4. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and going through the materials available on record, I do not find any good ground warranting interference in the impugned order dated 04.10.2023 passed by the tribunal. Accordingly, this petition is liable to be dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to raise all the grounds before the executing Court, as he is the sole legal representative of Kanak Kumar Tirkey (driver) and Salomani (owner of the vehicle) being their father and husband respectively.

¶19

5. With the aforesaid observations and liberty, this writ petition stands dismissed. No order as to cost(s).

¶20

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge

¶21

@d!t!

Elsemewar Tirkey v. Chandradev Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Elsemewar Tirkey v. Chandradev Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Chauhan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

M/S Kailash Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajkumar Vs General Public

Ravishankar Harpal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Subaso ( Since Dead) through Legal Representatives Vs Kamesari Bai ( Since Dead) through Legal Representatives

G.j.singh Vs Coal India Ltd. And Anr.