Partly allowed

Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Manoj Kumar Khatik and Others

Rajasthan HC10 Mar 2015CMA/2828/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeals in part, quashing and setting aside specific issues of the Tribunal's judgment and award. The matter was remanded to the Tribunal with directions to decide afresh after issuing notice and providing a hearing opportunity to all parties.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment and award quashed on issues 1, 2, and 3; matter remanded to Tribunal for fresh decision after notice and hearing.

Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Manoj Kumar Khatik and… — Insurance | Rajasthan HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶3

JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR.

¶4

J U D G M E N T

¶5

S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.2667/2014 (Manoj Kumar Khatik Versus Ramkalyan & Ors.)

¶6

S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.2828/2014 S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No.1909/2014 (Shri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Manoj Kumar Khatik & Ors.)

¶7

DATE OF JUDGMENT : 10.03.2015

¶8

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

¶9

Mr. Sanjay Singhal, counsel for claimant(s) Mr. Rakesh Bhargava, counsel for the Insurance Co.

¶10

Since both these appeals relate to one incident and arise out of the common judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal, hence the arguments have been heard together and they are being decided by this common judgment.

¶11

At the very outset, learned counsel for the claimant(s) submits that the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned judgment and award has not taken into consideration the grounds which he has raised by way of aforesaid appeal(s). The finding of learned Tribunal on issue no. 3 is contrary to the material available on record. Thus, the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal qua aforesaid issue(s) be quashed and set aside and the matter should be remanded to the learned Tribunal with the direction to decide the matter afresh qua aforesaid issue(s) in the light of grounds which he has raised by way of aforesaid appeal(s).

¶12

E Converso, the learned counsel for the Insurance Co. has/have opposed the arguments of learned counsel for the claimant(s). He has further contended that the Insurance Co. has also filed an appeal challenging the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. The finding of the learned

¶13

¶14

Tribunal qua issue nos. 1 and 2 is contrary to the material on record. However, he/they has/have contended that even if this Court is going to remand the matter, in such circumstances, the Tribunal should be directed to decide the matter afresh qua aforesaid issue(s), after giving opportunity of hearing to them also and in the light of the grounds raised by them by way of the aforesaid appeal.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record including the impugned judgment and award.

¶16

In my considered view, the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned judgment and award has not appreciated the facts of the case and the grounds raised by the learned counsel for the parties by way of their respective appeal(s) in a proper manner and passed the impugned judgment and award surreptitiously. Thus, the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal needs interference by this court.

¶17

In the result, the appeal(s) is/are partly allowed; the impugned judgment and award passed by learned Tribunal qua aforesaid issue(s) no. 1, 2 and 3 is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal with the direction to decide the matter afresh qua aforesaid issue(s) as early as possible , in the light of grounds raised by the learned counsel for the parties by way of the aforesaid appeal(s) and the judgment(s) to be cited by learned counsel for the parties, if any, after issuing notice to all the concerned parties and giving opportunity of hearing to them.

¶18

Both the parties are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 30.9.2015.

¶19

However, it is made clear that if any amount has been received by the claimant(s) under

¶20

¶21

the impugned award, the same shall not be recovered from him/them till disposal of the claim petition by the learned Tribunal afresh qua aforesaid issue(s).

¶22

Stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶23

(MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA)J.

¶24

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

¶25

Dilip Khandelwal PA

Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Manoj Kumar Khatik and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Manoj Kumar Khatik and Others

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

Raj Rajya Ath Parivahan Nigam Vs Lalit and Ors.

Ashok Saxena Vs Ratan Devi and Others

Shriram Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Manoj Kumar Khatik Vs Ram Kalyan and Others

Ghanshyam and Another Vs Hari Ram

Basanti Lal Vs Rajendra Kumar and Others