Partly allowed

Mst Sunita and Ors. v. Bhoor Singh and Ors.

Rajasthan HC24 Mar 2015CMA/2566/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court considered an appeal against an award under an insurance policy. Relying on the agreement to compromise, the court enhanced the compensation quantum to Rs. 1,25,000 and directed the insurer to deposit it with the tribunal within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Appeal partly allowed; compensation enhanced to Rs. 1,25,000 to be deposited with tribunal within 12 weeks; interest at 9% per annum if not paid within that timeframe.

Mst Sunita and Ors. Vs Bhoor Singh and Ors. — Insurance | Rajasthan HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

I N THE HI GH COURT OF JUDI CATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAI PUR BENCH, JAI PUR

¶3

HON' BLE MR. JUSTI CE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

¶4

Mr . Raj neesh Gupt a, counsel f or t he appel l ant s. Mr . Amar nat h Par eek, counsel f or t he I nsur ance Company.

¶5

Thi s appeal has been f i l ed agai nst t he j udgment and awar d passed by MACT f or enhancement of t he quant um of compensat i on.

¶6

Mr . Amar nat h Par eek Advocat e appear s on behal f of t he I nsur ance Company.

¶7

Keepi ng i n vi ew t he pi ous wor k of Lok Adal at , at t hi s st age t he counsel f or bot h t he par t i es i . e. t he cl ai mant s and t he i nsur ance company agr ee t hat t hi s appeal may be di sposed on t he basi s of t he compr omi se. The l ear ned counsel f or t he i nsur ance company gave consent f or enhanci ng t he amount of t he awar d i . e. Rs. 1, 25, 000/ - ( Rs. One Lac Twent y Fi ve Thousand) .

¶8

The enhanced amount shal l be i n addi t i on t o t he awar d amount and t he cl ai mant s appel l ant s ar e hel d ent i t l ed t o get t he af or esai d amount .

¶9

I n vi ew of above, t hi s appeal i s par t l y al l owed and i t i s di r ect ed t hat t he i nsur ance company shal l deposi t t he af or esai d amount wi t h t he l ear ned Tr i bunal wi t hi n a per i od of 12 weeks f r om t he dat e of r ecei pt of cer t i f i ed copy of t hi s or der and t he same shal l be di sbur sed t o t he cl ai mant s. I n case t he amount i s not pai d t o t he cl ai mant s wi t hi n a per i od of 12 weeks, t he cl ai mant s shal l be ent i t l ed t o i nt er est on t he enhanced amount @ 9 % per annum f r om t he dat e of passi ng of t hi s

¶10

¶11

j udgment . Rest of t he t er ms under t he awar d shal l r emai n unchanged. However , i t i s made cl ear t hat i f t her e i s any br each of i nsur ance pol i cy or vi ol at i on of t he t er ms of t he pol i cy, t he i nsur ance company shal l be at l i ber t y t o move an appl i cat i on bef or e t he execut i ng cour t f or r ecover i ng t he amount f r om t he owner of t he of f endi ng vehi cl e or he can move an appl i cat i on bef or e t hi s cour t f or r ecal l i ng of t he or der .

¶12

The i mpugned awar d st ands modi f i ed, as i ndi cat ed her e- i n- above.

¶13

( Mahesh Chandr a Shar ma) J.

¶14

Sur esh

¶15

All corrections made in the judgment /order have been incorporated in the judgment / order being E-mailed.

¶16

SK Sharma PS

Mst Sunita and Ors. v. Bhoor Singh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mst Sunita and Ors. v. Bhoor Singh 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

Smt Chahanya Bai and Ors. Vs Raju Lal Meena and Ors.

Ram Ratan Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp.

Chhota Bagru Cop Housing Society Ltd. Vs Saubhag Charitable Trust and Others

Ashok Kumar Vs Sanjay Kumar and Others

Kalu Mali Vs Haryana Roadways and Ors.

Vashu Dev Vs R S R T C and Ors.