Disposed

National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sanju Raju and Ors.

J&K HC2 Jul 2020RP/10/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two applications were disposed of. In CM No.1876, delay in filing a review petition was condoned. In RP No.10, the review petition was dismissed as there was no error apparent on the face of the record regarding the maintenance negligence finding in a motor accident case.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 126 days in filing review petition condoned; Review petition in RP No.10/2020 dismissed.

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sanju Raju and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | J&K HC (2020)

¶1

Sr. No.206 Supplementary-1

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU

¶3

RP No.10/2020 CM Nos.1876 & 1887 of 2020

¶4

National Insurance Company Limited

¶5

...Petitioner(s)

¶6

Through:- Mr. C.S.Gupta, Advocate

¶7

V/s

¶8

Sanju Raju and others

¶9

...Respondent(s)

¶10

Through:-

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE

¶12

ORDER

¶13

CM No.1876/2020

¶14

This is an application filed by the petitioner seeking condonation of delay in filing the review petition on the ground that the same was neither deliberate nor intentional but because of procedural formalities.

¶15

For the reasons stated in the application, it is allowed and the delay of 126 days in filing the review petition is condoned.

¶16

RP No.10/2020

¶17

The National Insurance Company Limited ( for brevity ‘the insurer’) seeks the review of the judgment passed by this Court on 23.07.2019 in MA No.142/2018, whereby the appeal preferred by the claimants (respondent Nos. 1 to 3) against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ramban (hereinafter ‘the Tribunal’) dated 28.07.2018 was allowed and the matter remanded to the Tribunal to proceed in the matter and determine compensation payable to the claimants.

¶18

The review has been sought by the petitioner on the ground that this Court misread the evidence on record to come to the conclusion that the

¶19

2 RP No.10/2020

¶20

motor vehicular accident had happened due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

¶21

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record, I am of the view that there is no error apparent on the face of record in the judgment, sought to be reviewed and, therefore, this review petition is not maintainable.

¶22

Mr. C.S.Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, vehemently contends that the finding of this Court that coming out of tyre rod of the offending vehicle was in itself a proof of negligence on part of the owner as well as driver, is perverse and, therefore, the judgment suffers from an error apparent on the face of record.

¶23

From the perusal of the judgment, sought to be reviewed by the petitioner, it is abundantly clear that this Court after taking note of the evidence on record returned finding of fact that coming out of the tyre rod from the offending vehicle speaks about the negligence of the owner as well as driver. This Court concluded that a person, who keeps a motor vehicle and brings it on the road was under an obligation to maintain it properly, so that it does not pose any danger to the life and property of the citizens using the roads. It was, thus, held that it was a case where the driver and owner of the offending vehicle had failed to take reasonable care and caution and had brought the vehicle on road, which, because of its poor maintenance, was a potential threat to the lives and property of the citizens using the roads. It is because of this act of negligence on part of the owner and driver, the deceased became a causality.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner despite his vehemence could not demonstrate any error of fact or law apparent on the face of record.

¶25

¶26

RP No.10/2020

¶27

In view of the above, I find no merit in this review petition warranting

¶28

review of the judgment. Accordingly, the same is dismissed.

¶29

(Sanjeev Kumar) Judge

¶30

JAMMU 02.07.2020 Vinod.

¶31

Whether the order is speaking :Yes/No Whether the order is reportable :Yes/No

¶32

VINOD KUMAR 2020.07.03 18:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sanju Raju and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sanju Raju and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bakel Chand and Ors. Vs Vijay Kumar

M/S J K Polythyene Vs Union Territory of J and K Th Industries and Commerce Deptt and Ors.

National Insurance C.Ltd. Vs Shamima and Ors.

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Aziz Din

National Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Mohinder Singh and Ors.

UOI.TH.529,ASC Bn Vs Varinder Kumar and Ors.