Dismissed

Divisional Manager v. Sushila

Rajasthan HC19 Aug 2019CMA/1263/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal was dismissed summarily based on a sister appeal decided on the same basis. The court placed the present case on the same terms as a related appeal regarding a claim petition decision by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. No substantive legal reasoning was provided as the matter was decided on a common ground with a sister appeal.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed in the same terms as S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1269/2019.

Divisional Manager Vs Sushila — Insurance | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1263/2019

¶3

Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, Near LIC Office, Mandia Road, Pali, District Pali, Rajasthan.

(Insurance Company)

----Appellant

Versus

Sushila W/o Late Shri Vishan Singh, Aged About 40 Years, 2. Virendra Singh S/o Late Shri Vishan Singh, Aged About 20 Years,

¶8

Priyanka D/o Late Shri Vishan Singh, Aged About 18 Years,

¶9

Hanwant Singh S/o Late Shri Vishan Singh, Aged About 16 Years, Respondent No.4 Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Resp. No. 1 Sushila W/o Late Shri Vishan Singh, B/c Raavna Rajput, All R/o Bar, Tehsil Raipur, District Pali.

¶10

...(Claimant)

¶11

Satiya @ Satyaprakash S/o Malaram, B/c Meghwal, R/o Lilamba, Police Station Raipur, District Pali (Raj.) (Driver Of Insured Tata Truck No. RJ-22-GA-7035)

¶12

Anwar Khan S/o Shri Dina Khan, B/c Moyla Musalmaan, R/o Kheda Mamawas (Giri), Moyla Ka Baas, Police Station Raipur, Tehsil Raipur, District Pali (Raj.) (Owner Of Insured Tata Truck No RJ-22-GA-7035)

¶13

----Respondents

¶14

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Aditya Singh

¶15

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Judgment

19/08/2019

(2 of 3)

[CMA-1263/2019]

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this Court in S. B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1269/2019 decided on 20.05.2019 has disposed of the appeal in the following terms :-

¶21

“ Upon hearing learned counsel for the appellant, in my opinion, the argument of learned counsel cannot be sustained because learned Tribunal has decided the claim petition on the basis of material available on record in absence of any contrary evidence produced by the Insurer. If the quantum of compensation is examined with pragmatic approach, then, it would ipsofacto reveal that the learned Tribunal, while considering age of the deceased as 38 years has applied multiplier of 15 for quantifying the amount of compensation for loss of dependency. Besides under other heads learned Tribunal has awarded compensation by relying on a decision of Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd V/s Pranay Sethi [2017 (13) Scale 12}.

¶22

In my view, the amount of compensation

¶23

determined by learned Tribunal cannot be categorized as excessive or exorbitant in the backdrop of facts and circumstances of the case. Moreover, the learned Tribunal has simply directed the Insurer to first pay compensation to the respondent-claimants and then recover the same from the insured as well as driver of the vehicle. Therefore, in that backdrop also, no interference with the impugned judgment and award is warranted.

¶24

Resultantly, appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed summarily. ”

¶25

Since, the present case is squarely covered by the judgment dated 20.05.2019 as the present appeal also arise out of the common order passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pali dated 31.01.2019 and the same was the subject matter of the same accident which is in question in this case.

¶26

(3 of 3)

¶27

[CMA-1263/2019]

¶28

Therefore, the present appeal is also dismissed in the same terms as S. B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1269/2019.

¶29

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶30

52-SunilS/-

Divisional Manager v. Sushila

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Divisional Manager v. Sushila

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Heera Lal Jat Vs Ashok Anand and Anr.

Rajbala Vs State and Ors.

Balendra Kumar Garasiya Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Rukmani Devi and Ors. Vs Suraj Das and Ors.

Motiram Vs State

Debu Singh Vs Jaipal Singh