Partly allowed

Amit Kumar Soni v. Rajkapoor and Ors.

Rajasthan HC12 Apr 2017CMA/1771/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a Motor Accident Claims Appeal filed for enhancement of compensation. Upon the parties reaching a compromise via Lok Adalat, the Court allowed the appeal in part, directing the insurance company to deposit Rs. 85,000 as enhancement.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is partly allowed; the respondent-insurance company directed to deposit Rs. 85,000 enhanced compensation with the Tribunal within six weeks, liable for 9% interest if delayed.

Amit Kumar Soni Vs Rajkapoor and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1771 / 2017

¶3

Amit Kumar Soni S/o Mohan Lal Soni, by Caste Soni, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Kunda Mohalla, Govindgarh, District Alwar (Rajasthan).

¶4

----Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

Rajkapoor S/o Ram Singh, by Caste Jatav, R/o Ramgarh District Alwar (Rajasthan) - Driver of Vehicle Truck No. R.J.-02-G.A.-1669

¶7

Kamrudeen S/o Suleman, by Caste Mev, R/o House No. 49, Badaud, Tehsil Ramgarh, District Alwar (Rajasthan) - Owner of Vehicle Truck No. R.J.-02-G.A.-1669

¶8

The New India Insurance Company Limited, Divisional Office Near Power House Circlem Alwar, Alwar - Insurer of Vehicle Truck No. R.J.-02-G.A.-1669, Insurance Policy No.

¶9

33060031150100001045, Insurance Period Date From 27.04.2015 to 26.04.2016

¶10

----Non-Claimants/Respondents

¶11

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Girish Khandelwal.

¶12

For Respondent(s) : Ms. Chitra Goyal.

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA Judgment

¶14

12/04/2017

¶15

This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for enhancement of the quantum of compensation.

¶16

(2 of 3)

¶17

[CMA-1771/2017]

¶18

Keeping in view the pious work of Lok Adalat, at this stage, the counsel for both the parties i.e. the claimant/s and the insurance company agree that this appeal may be disposed of on the basis of the compromise.

¶19

The learned counsel for the respondent/insurance company gave consent for enhancing the amount of the award i.e. Rs.85,000/- (rupees eighty five thousands only) in favour of claimants. This amount shall be in addition to the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal and the claimants-appellants are held entitled to get the aforesaid amount.

¶20

In view of above, this appeal is partly allowed and it is directed that the respondent-insurance company shall deposit the aforesaid enhanced amount with the learned Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and the same shall be disbursed to the claimant/s immediately. In case the amount is not paid to the claimant/s within the stipulated period of six weeks, the claimant/s shall be entitled to interest @ 9% per annum on the enhanced amount from the date of passing of this judgment. Rest of the terms under the award shall remain unchanged.

¶21

However, it is made clear that if there is any breach of insurance policy or violation of the terms of the policy, the respondent/insurance company shall be at liberty to move an application before the executing court for recovering the amount from the owner of the offending vehicle or he can move an application before this court for recalling of the order.

¶22

(3 of 3)

¶23

[CMA-1771/2017]

¶24

The impugned award stands modified, as indicated here-in-

¶25

above.

¶26

(MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA) J.

¶27

Manisha/-238

Amit Kumar Soni v. Rajkapoor and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar Soni v. Rajkapoor 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

Suresh Mali Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Harun Khan Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Dhaulram Meena Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Narendra Singh Sodha Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

M/S Haryana Milk Foods Ltd. and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Ganga Lahri Alias Lahari Vs Shiv Dayal