Disposed¶14

Betty Sharly etc. v. Shibu

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Feb 2026FAO/853/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Punjab and Haryana High Court; FAO-853-2001; FAO-2773-2000; Justice Deepak Gupta; MACT Faridabad award 11.08.2000; Section 166 Motor Vehicle Act; death of Sharly Philip; accident 27.12.1994; Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.; enhancement; third party; exoneration; disposal for want of representation; unserved notices; SHO; liberty to revive appeals.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the claimants to get the appeals revived in case any cause of action survives and they wish to pursue the same; the insurance company's appeal also liable to be revived upon any such application by the claimant. ¶14

Betty Sharly etc. Vs Shibu — Motor Accident Claims | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

********

¶3

229
I.		FAO-853-2001
Be�y Sharly and Others Shibu and Another	Vs.	…..Appellants .….Respondents
II.		FAO-2773-2000
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Be�y Sharly and Others	Vs.	…..Appellant .….Respondents
		Date of Decision:19.02.2026

¶4

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

¶5

Present:None for the appellants in FAO-853-2001.

¶6

Mr. Sanjiv Pabbi, Advocate for the appellant in FAO-2773-2000 and for respondent No.2 in FAO-853-2001.

¶7

¶8

DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

¶9

On account of death of one Sharly Philip, who expired in a motor vehicular accident, which took place on 27.12.1994, his widow, two minor children and father filed a claim pe//on under Sec/on 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act which was disposed of by MACT, Faridabad on 11.08.2000. Against this award, two appeals were filed, one by the claimants i.e. FAO-853-2001 seeking enhancement; whereas the other appeal i.e. FAO-2773-2000 was filed by the insurance company for exonera/on on the ground that deceased was not a third party.

¶10

NEETIKA TUTEJA 2026.02.19 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶11

FAO-853-2001 FAO-2773-2000

¶12

-2-

¶13

In the appeal as filed by the insurance company, no/ces were sent to respondents/claimants but the same remained unserved as it was reported that they were no longer residing at the given address. Efforts were even made to serve the respondent through SHO of the concerned police sta/on but in vain.

¶14

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, when there is no representa/on on behalf of the claimants, both these appeals stand disposed of, with liberty to the claimants to get the same revived, in case, any cause of ac/on survives and in case, they want to pursue the same. As and when any such applica/on is moved by the claimant, the appeal pertaining to the insurance company shall also be liable to be revived.

¶15

A photocopy of this order be placed on the connected case

¶16

file.

¶17

(DEEPAK GUPTA) JUDGE February 19, 2026 Nee/ka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶18

NEETIKA TUTEJA 2026.02.19 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Betty Sharly etc. v. Shibu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Betty Sharly etc. v. Shibu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak and Anr. Vs Birmati and Others

Smt Ram Rati and Ors. Vs Hy.St.

Deepak Kumar Vs Jagjit Sinngh and Anors

(O&M) Oriental Ins.Co.Ltd. Vs Betty Sharly etc.

Vinod Kumar etc. Vs Bhola Singh etc.

State of Haryana Vs Kashmir Singh