Aneesh Issar & Anr. vs Anita & Ors.
2009 Latest Caselaw 3579 Del

2
*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                       +       MAC.APP.No.403/2009

%                                 Date of decision: 4th September, 2009

      ANEESH ISSAR & ANR.                   ..... Appellants
                    Through : Mr. K.K. Rohatgi, Adv.

                      versus

      ANITA & ORS.                                   ..... Respondents
                           Through : None.

CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

1.      Whether Reporters of Local papers may
        be allowed to see the Judgment?

2.      To be referred to the Reporter or not?

3.      Whether the judgment should be
        reported in the Digest?

                               JUDGMENT (Oral)

CM No.11783/2009 (Exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

2. CM stands disposed of.

MAC.APP. 403/2009 and CM Nos.11781-82/2009

1. The appellant has challenged the award of the learned

Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.9,50,000/- has been

awarded to the claimants/respondents No.1 to 6.

2. The accident dated 27th July, 2006 resulted in the death of

Devinder Kumar Garg. The deceased was survived by his widow,

two daughters, one son and parents who filed the claim petition

before the learned Tribunal.

3. The deceased was aged 49 years at the time of the accident

and was carrying on his business earning Rs.99,020/- per month.

The offending vehicle was owned by appellant No.2 and was

driven by appellant No.1 at the time of the accident. The

offending vehicle was insured with respondent No.7.

4. On 21st August, 2007, the case was taken up for conciliation

by the learned Tribunal when respondent No.7 offered a sum of

Rs.9,50,000/- in full and final settlement which was accepted by

the claimants. The learned Tribunal recorded the statement of

the claimants and respondent No.7 and passed the award for

Rs.9,50,000/- in favour of the claimants/respondents No.1 to 6, in

pursuance to which the respondent No.7 deposited the award

amount which was released to the claimants on 1st November,

2007.

5. There is a delay of 609 days in filing of this appeal. There is

no justifiable reason for non-appearance of the appellants before

the learned Tribunal on 20th and 21st August, 2007. Admittedly,

the appellant was being prosecuted by the police for causing the

accident by rash and negligent driving. It is also admitted that

the appellant has also not challenged the order of the

prosecution against him as well as the order framing the charge.

6. No case for condonation of delay is made out.

7. Even on merits no case is made out.

8. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed as barred by limitation

as well as on merits.

J.R. MIDHA, J.

SEPTEMBER 04, 2009/mk