Dharambir Singh Dhankar Vs Permanent Lok Adalat and Anr. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Dharambir Singh Dhankar Vs Permanent Lok Adalat and Anr. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned order dated 28.05.2014 of the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Gurgaon set aside; petitioner given liberty to move an appropriate application seeking compensation before the competent Forum/Permanent Lok Adalat having jurisdiction; question of limitation to be considered and decided by the concerned Forum in accordance with law, keeping in view pendency of the matter before this Court.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Gurgaon had jurisdiction to entertain and decide the petitioner's insurance claim application, given that the insurance policy was issued from Bombay/Mumbai. +1 more

Court's answer

In the instant case the vehicle met with an accident at Najafgarh, Delhi, which gives competence to the Lok Adalat having jurisdiction over the area.

Ratio / Principle

An application claiming compensation under the insurance policy can be entertained and decided by the Permanent Lok Adalat having territorial jurisdiction, as it does not involve complicated questions of fact.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (CWP-17868-2014, decided 07.07.2026, Tribhuvan Dahiya, J.) — Writ of certiorari against order dated 28.05.2014 of the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Gurgaon refusing to adjudicate the petitioner's insurance claim for school bus HR-55K-1590 on the grounds of complicated questions of law and facts and want of jurisdiction (policy issued from Bombay/Mumbai). Held: an application claiming compensation under an insurance policy can be entertained and decided by the Permanent Lok Adalat having territorial jurisdiction, as it does not involve complicated questions of fact; the accident having occurred at Najafgarh, Delhi, competence vests in the Lok Adalat having jurisdiction over that area. Order set aside; petitioner at liberty to move a fresh application before the competent forum; question of limitation left to the concerned forum in view of pendency before the High Court.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

208

CWP-17868-2014 Date of decision: July 07, 2026

DHARAMB I R SINGH DHANKHAR

...Petitione r

Versus

PERMANE N T LOK ADALAT FOR P U BLIC UTILITY SERVICES , GURGAON, HARYANA

...Respondent s

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA

Present: Mr. Rajesh Lamba, Advocate wit h Ms. Manisha Lamba, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate w ith Ms. Aastha Sharma, Advocate for respondent no.2.

TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL)

The petition has been filed inter alia seeking a writ of certiorar i quashing the order dated 28.05.2014, passe d by the Permanent Lok Adala t (Public Utilit y Services), Gurgaon, whereby t h e petitioner’s application seekin g insurance cl a im in respect of vehicle/school bus bearing registration no . HR-55K-1590 has not been decided on the g r ound that complicated question s of law and f acts are involved. And that th e Permanent Lok Adalat has n o jurisdiction, a s the insurance policy has been i s sued from Bombay/Mumbai. 2. Learned counsel for the petition e r contends that both the aforesai d reasons are not sustainable. The matter involv e s accidental claim of the vehicl e in question, w hich is required to be adjudic a ted in the light of the insuranc e policy issue d by respondent no.2/Insuranc e Company. And the place o f issuance of i nsurance policy is not determi n ative of the jurisdiction, whic h depends upo n where the cause of action aris e s. Undisputedly, the accident i n

JASPREET KAUR 2026.07.16 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CWP-17868-2014

-2-

question occurred at Najafgarh, Delhi, and therefore, the cause of action did not arise in Mumbai.

Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that there is no dispute with regard to the issuance of insurance policy or the competence of the Lok Adalat to assess the claim. However, even if the accident occurred at Najafgarh, Delhi, the Permanent Lok Adalat at Gurgaon has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the claim application.

Heard.

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the undisputed factual position mentioned above, this Court is of the opinion that an application claiming compensation under the insurance policy can be entertained and decided by the Permanent Lok Adalat having territorial jurisdiction, as it does not involve complicated questions of fact. And in the instant case the vehicle met with an accident at Najafgarh, Delhi, which gives competence to the Lok Adalat having jurisdiction over the area.

Accordingly, the order dated 28.05.2014 is set aside, with liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate application seeking compensation before the competent Forum/Permanent Lok Adalat having jurisdiction. The question of limitation will be considered and decided by the concerned Forum in accordance with law, keeping in view pendency of the matter before this Court.

July 07, 2026	(TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA)
Jaspreet Kaur Whether speaking/reasoned	JUDGE  : Yes/No
Whether reportable	: Yes/No

JASPREET KAUR 2026.07.16 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh