Dismissed

Sachin Awana and Anr. v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Ors.

Delhi HC15 Jan 2024CM(M)/1/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Article 227 challenging a MACT order impleading the owner and driver of an offending vehicle as respondents in a motor accident claim. The petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to seek impleadment relief before the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as withdrawn; liberty granted to move an appropriate application under Order I Rule 10 CPC before the court concerned.

Sachin Awana and Anr. Vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd… — Motor Accident Claims | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CM(M) 1/2024

¶4

SACHIN AWANA AND ANR ..... Petitioners

¶5

Through: Ms. Manveen Dhanjal, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD AND ORS

..... Respondents

Through: None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA

¶12

O R D E R % 15.01.2024

¶13

CM APPL. 20/2024 (exemption)

¶14

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶15

Application stands disposed of.

¶16

CM(M) 1/2024

¶17

This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India whereby the petitioners, viz. owner and driver of the offending vehicle involved in the incident, have assailed the impugned order dated 13.07.2023 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, MACT (SouthEast), Saket Court, New Delhi, whereby the petitioners have been impleaded as respondents in the pending proceeding.

¶18

It appears that an application under Order I Rule 10 CPC was moved on behalf of the respondent/insurance company and it was alleged that the petitioner No.1 was the owner of the vehicle whereas the petitioner No.2 was driving the same under the influence of

¶19

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 03:05:21

¶20

alcohol.

¶21

After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that she may be allowed to withdraw the present petition with liberty to move an application under Order I Rule 10 CPC for striking off the name of the petitioners from the array of parties before the Court concerned.

¶22

Present petition is accordingly dismissed, as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners to move appropriate application before the court concerned as per the law.

¶23

DHARMESH SHARMA, J.

¶24

JANUARY 15, 2024/ck

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 03:05:21

Sachin Awana and Anr. v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin Awana and Anr. v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Anil Kumar Verma Vs Ms. Rakhi

Major Genral Surinder Kumar Batra Vs Brig Sri Krishan Batra (Deceased Thr Lrs) and Ors.

Jagjot Singh Vs Pawan Preet

Rituraj Shukla Vs Lydia Monica John

Zaibi Hussain Vs Jamal Tariq

Rajat Arora Vs Mr. Deep Bajaj & Ors.

Pitam Goel Vs Radhey Shyam

Tuf Metallurgical Pvt. Ltd. Vs Nortech Ferroalloys Pvt. Ltd.

Golden Assets Holdings Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs Sanjay Gupta & Anr.

Khoushik Reddy Ananth and Ors. Vs Shefali Sihag

Harender Singh (Hawaldar) Vs Kavit Kumar

Ms. Kuber Alloys Vs M/S B.A. Alloys Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Ankan Chatterjee Vs Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited