Partly allowed

Geeta Meena v. Phool Khan and Ors.

Rajasthan HC19 Mar 2015CMA/2989/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This was a compromise settlement recorded in an appeal. By consent, the compensation quantum was enhanced by Rs. 35,000. The Insurer was directed to deposit it and pay the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal before 12 weeks. Interest at 9% per annum is awarded for delayed payment, subject to a proviso for recovery if there is a breach of the insurance policy.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced amount of Rs. 35,000 directed to be deposited with the Tribunal within 12 weeks; 9% interest per annum payable for delay.

Geeta Meena Vs Phool Khan and Ors. — Rajasthan HC (2015) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

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

¶3

S. B. Ci vi l Mi sc. Appeal No. 2989/ 2013 ( Geet a Meena Vs. Phool Khan & Or s. )

¶4

Dat e of Judgment : : 19. 3. 2015

¶5

HON' BLE MR. JUSTI CE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

¶6

Mr . Ri t esh Jai n, counsel f or t he appel l ant . Mr . Al i . Mohd. Khan, counsel f or t he I nsur ance Company.

¶7

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.

¶8

Mr . Al i Mohd. Khan Advocat e appear s on behal f of t he I nsur ance Company.

¶9

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. 35, 000/ - ( Rs. Thi r t y Fi ve Thousand) .

¶10

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 .

¶11

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

¶12

¶13

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 .

¶14

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

¶15

( Mahesh Chandr a Shar ma) J.

¶16

Sur esh

¶17

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

¶18

SK Sharma PS

Geeta Meena v. Phool Khan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Geeta Meena v. Phool Khan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satyaveer Vs Sandeep Kumar and Ors.

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Kailash Chand and Another

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Vikesh Bathla and Others

Smt Gulab Devi and Ors. Vs Suva Lal and Ors.

Damodar Vs Narpat Singh and Ors.

Lekhraj Vs Naiem Khan and Ors.