Allowed

Kashinath Barman S/O Shri Mahadev Barman v. Arjun Singh S/O Shri Bane Singh

Rajasthan HC5 Dec 2023CMA/2001/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, set aside the order of insurance compensation, and restored the claim to the original/appropriate amount of Rs.5,63,600/- against the respondents including the National Insurance Company.

What did the court decide?

The claim for compensation of Rs. 5,63,600/- was allowed against the respondents.

Kashinath Barman S/O Shri Mahadev Barman Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JP:37977]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2001/2018

¶4

Kashinath Berman S/o Mahadev Berman, Age 45 years,

¶5

Smt. Dropadi Barman W/o Shri Kashinath Barman, Aged About 40 Years,

¶6

Mitthan S/o Shri Kashinath Barman, Aged About 19 Years, All R/o Bajari Mandi, Minrwa Takij Ke Piche, Sanganeri Gate, Jaipur

¶7

----Appellants

¶8

Versus

¶9

Arjun Singh S/o Shri Bane Singh R/o Rajputo Ki Dhani, Sumel, Agra Road, Tehsil Bassi, Jaipur.

¶10

Sajjan Singh S/o Shri Chawand Singh Chauhan, R/o Plot No. C-23-24, J.p Colony, New Kheda, Vidyadhar Nagar, Jaipur

¶11

National Insurance Company Ltd, Regional Office, M.i. Road, Jaipur Through Regional Manager.

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Bhanu Prakash, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhi Goyal, Adv.

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS Judgment / Order

¶15

05/12/2023

¶16

[email protected] dh vksj ls ;g vihy vUrxZr /kkjk 173 eksVj okgu vf/kfu;e U;k;ky; vij ftyk U;k;k/kh'k]dze la[;k&14] t;iqj egkuxj }kjk eksVj nq?kZVuk okn la[;k 32@2016 esa ikfjr vokMZ o fu.kZ; fnukad 12-01-2018 ls O;fFkr gksdj is'k dh gSA vihyk/khu vokMZ ds ek/;e ls vihykFkhZ dze&1 o 2 ds iq= o vihykFkhZ la[;k&3 ds HkkbZ rkjd e.My

¶17

(2 of 3) [CMA-2001/2018]

¶18

[2023:RJ-JP:37977]

¶19

dh okgu nq?kZVuk esa gqbZ e`R;q ds ifj.kkeLo:i dqy 5]08]600@& :i;s dh izfrdj jkf'k N% izfr'kr okf"kZd lk/kkj.k C;kt lfgr fnyk;s tkus dk vkns'k ikfjr fd;k gS ftlesa c<ksRrjh gsrq ;g vihy izLrqr dh x;h gSA

¶20

chek dEiuh vFkok okgu Lokeh@ekfyd dh vksj ls vk{ksfir fu.kZ; ds fo:) dksbZ vihy is'k ugha dh x;h gSA

¶21

fo}ku vf/koDrk vihykFkhZx.k dk fuosnu gS fd laink dh gkfu ds en esa dksbZ jkf'k ugha fnyk;h x;h gS rFkk blds vfrfjDr dalksfVZ;e dh gkfu ds en esa jkf'k de fnyk;h x;h gSA

¶22

fo}ku vf/koDrk chek dEiuh@izR;FkhZ dze&3 ds fo}ku vf/koDrk }kjk v/khuLFk vf/kdj.k ds fu.kZ; dks fof/k&lEer gksuk crkrs gq, izLrqr vihy [kkfjt fd;s tkus dk fuosnu fd;kA

¶23

lquk x;k] izLrqr rdksaZ ij fopkj fd;k x;kA

¶24

vihykFkhZ la[;k 1 o 2 e`rd ds ekrk&firk gSa] vr% nksuksa dks Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanuram & Ors. (2018) 18 SCC 130 esa izfrikfnr fl)kUr ds vuqlkj dalksfVZ;e dh gkfu ds en esa pkyhl&pkyhl gtkj :i;s izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh gSa] tcfd v/khuLFk vf/kdj.k }kjk dqy 40]000@& :i;s bl en esa fnyk;s gSaA bl izdkj bl en esa 40]000@& :i;s dh jkf'k c<ksRrjh ;ksX; gSA

¶25

blds vfrfjDr fo}ku v/khuLFk vf/kdj.k }kjk laink dh gkfu ds en esa dksbZ jkf'k ugha fnyk;h gS] tcfd bl en esa 15]000@& :i;s dh jkf'k fnyk;s tkus ;ksX; gSA

[CMA-2001/2018]

[2023:RJ-JP:37977]

(3 of 3)

'ks"k enksa esa fo}ku v/khuLFk vf/kdj.k }kjk tks jkf'k fnyk;h x;h gS] og iw.kZr% ;qfDr;qDr o fof/k&lEer gS] ftlesa fdlh izdkj dk gLr{ksi fd;k tkuk U;k;ksfpr ugha gSA

¶30

bl izdkj v/khuLFk vf/kdj.k }kjk tks vokMZ ikfjr fd;k x;k gS mlesa dqy 55]000@& :i;s dh c<ksRrjh fd;k tkuk mfpr gSA

¶31

mijksDr foospukuqlkj fo}ku v/khuLFk vf/kdj.k }kjk tks 5]08]600@&:i;s dk vokMZ ikfjr fd;k x;k gS mlds LFkku ij [email protected] 5]63]600@&:i;s izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh gSA

¶32

rn~uqlkj ;g vihy vkaf'kd :i ls Lohdkj dh tkdj vk{ksfir vokMZ dks mikUrfjr djrs gq, [email protected] ds i{k esa dqy 5]63]600@&:i;s dk vokMZ ikfjr fd;k tkrk gSA [email protected] }kjk iwoZ esa izkIr dh x;h jkf'k dks iapkV jkf'k esa ls lek;ksftr dh tkosxh rFkk c<h gqbZ jkf'k ij Dyse ;kfpdk is'k fd;s tkus dh fnukad ls olwyh rd 7 izfr'kr lk/kkj.k okf"kZd C;kt dh nj ls [email protected] dks fnyk;s tkus dk vkns'k fn;k tkrk gS] iapkV dh 'ks"k 'krsZa ;Fkkor jgsaxhA

¶33

v/khuLFk vf/kdj.k dk vfHkys[k vkns'k dh izfr ds lkFk ykSVk;k tkosA

¶34

(UMA SHANKER VYAS),J

¶35

Mittal /111

Kashinath Barman S/O Shri Mahadev Barman v. Arjun Singh S/O Shri Bane Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kashinath Barman S/O Shri Mahadev Barman v. Arjun Singh S/O Shri Bane Singh

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

Sahab Singh and Ors. Vs Santosh Kumar

Union of India through the General Manager Vs Smt. Aachudi Alias Aachu Devi W/O Late Shri Kishoremal

Shekhar Home Developers through Its Managing Partner Shri Rajnesh Aggarwal Vs Amit Kumar Lamba

Kamlesh Kumar Meena Son of Shri Lallu Ram Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt Archana S/O Late Ravindra Kumar Vs Jesaram S/O Pokharmal

Smt Ramu and Ors. Vs Surajkaran and Ors.