The New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Sh. Vinod Dass & Ors
2012 Latest Caselaw 5278 Del

*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                             Date of decision: 4th September, 2012
+       MAC APP. 540/2004

        THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.         ..... Appellant
                      Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv.

                     versus

        SH. VINOD DASS & ORS.                         ..... Respondents
                      Through:          Nemo.


        CORAM:
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

                                  JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The Appellant New India Assurance Company Limited impugns a judgment dated 15.07.2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby while awarding a compensation of `2,23,575/- in favour of the First Respondent, the Appellant was granted recovery rights on the ground that the insured committed breach of the terms of policy.

2. The Appellant Insurance Company did not take steps for service of Respondent No.1 in spite of the fact that he (Respondent No.1/the Claimant) was ordered to be served by publication in 'Amar Ujala.'

3. By order dated 15.07.2009 the Appellant was burdened with costs of `2,000/- and he was again directed to take steps for issuance of citation in terms of order dated 19.03.2008. Neither the steps were taken nor the

costs was paid. The costs imposed on the Appellant was waived by order dated 03.02.2010.

4. The Appellant was again directed to take steps for service of the First Respondent. Again, the steps have not been taken.

5. This Appeal was instituted in the year 2004. The Appeal as against the first Respondent is dismissed.

6. For the reasons as stated in connected Appeals being MAC APP.516/2004, 517/2004 and 519/2004 decided by a separate order today, the Appellant Insurance Company was not liable to pay the compensation at all, as the first Respondent was travelling as a gratuitous passenger. Since the Appeal against the first Respondent has been dismissed, he shall be entitled to withdraw the compensation deposited with the Claims Tribunal.

7. As the Appellant had no liability to pay the compensation at all, it would be entitled to recover it from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle No.HR-38B-2523.

8. The Appeal is disposed of in above terms.

9. Pending Applications also stand disposed of.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE SEPTEMBER 04, 2012 vk