Remanded

Virender Kumar v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Apr 2012CRM-M/34279/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court set aside the order of the Judicial Magistrate that dismissed the petitioner's application for transfer of an insurance-salvage vehicle. Relying on Supreme Court guidelines, the matter was remanded to the trial court to consider the application afresh, including the financier's interest, after the insurer furnishes a required undertaking.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 2.4.2008 set aside; matter remanded to trial court to consider petitioner's application afresh per Supreme Court guidelines and pass appropriate orders.

Virender Kumar Vs State of Haryana — Insurance | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Crl.M. No.M-34279 of 2008 Date of Decision:20.4.2012

Virender Kumar

.... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

¶7

.... Respondents

¶8

CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur

¶9

Present: Mr. A.S. Virk, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Rattu, D.A.G. Haryana.

¶10

Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶11

¶12

1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶13

2.To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶14

3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶15

NIRMALJIT KAUR, J.(Oral)

¶16

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for setting aside the order dated 2.4.2008 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kurukshetra, whereby the application for permission to transfer the vehicle bearing No.HR-69A-4517 in the name of Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and to permit the transfer of registration certificate of the above said vehicle in the name of the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. has been dismissed.

¶17

It is contended that alleged vehicle which met with an accident was financed by M/s Kotak Mahindera Bank Ltd. The accident has resulted into total loss to the vehicle and insurance claim of the petitioner in this regard has been finalized but they are not able to release the amount for further payment by the petitioner to the M/s Kotak Mahindera Bank Ltd. who is the financier in the said case, on account of the fact the vehicle has not been transferred in the name of the Oriental Insurance Company.

¶18

Crl.M. No.M-34279 of 2008

¶19

-2-

¶20

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of General Insurance Council and others v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others (2010) 6 SCC 768 has laid down certain guidelines to be followed scrupulously in such like cases considering the mandate of Section 451 read with Section 457 of the Code. Para 13 of the said judgment reads as under:

¶21

“13. In our considered opinion, the aforesaid information is required to be utilised and followed scrupulously and has to be given positively as and when asked for by the insurer. We also feel, it is necessary that in addition to the directions issued by this Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai considering the mandate of Section 451 read with Section 457 of the Code, the following further directions with regard to seized vehicles are required to be given:

¶22

“(A) Insurer may be permitted to move a separate application for release of the recovered vehicle as soon as it is informed of such recovery before the jurisdictional court. Ordinarily, release shall be made within a period of 30 days from the date of the application. The necessary photographs may be taken duly authenticated and certified, and a detailed panchnama may be prepared before such release. (B) The photographs so taken may be used as secondary evidence during trial. Hence, physical production of the vehicle may be dispensed with.

¶23

¶24

-3-

¶25

Crl.M. No.M-34279 of 2008

¶26

remit the proceeds from the sale/auction of the vehicle conducted by the Insurance Company in the event that the Magistrate finally adjudicates that the rightful ownership of the vehicle does not vest with the insurer. The undertaking/guarantee would be furnished at the time of release of the vehicle, pursuant to the application for release of the recovered vehicle. Insistence on personal bonds may be dispensed with looking to the corporate structure of the insurer.”

¶27

In view of the above, order dated 2.4.2008 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kurukshetra is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the trial Court to consider the application of the petitioner afresh in terms of the aforesaid guidelines and thereafter pass appropriate orders after hearing all the concerned parties including M/s Kotak Mahindera Bank Ltd as well as the Insurance company. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the next before the trial Court is 28.4.2012.

¶28

The parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on the date fixed before it i.e. 28.4.2012.

¶29

Disposed of accordingly.

¶30

20.4.2012 rajeev

¶31

( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) JUDGE

Virender Kumar v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virender Kumar v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kulvinder Kaur & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Manav Chandra & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Rohit Parti Vs Ut of Chandigarh and Anr.

Kulwinder Kaur and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Paramjeet & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Sarwan Singh Vs State of Punjab