Shri Laxman Ram @ Nathi & Anr. vs The New India Assurance Co Ltd & ...
2013 Latest Caselaw 4946 Del

$~41
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                  Judgment delivered on: 28th October, 2013


+                                CM(M) 1154/2013

       SHRI LAXMAN RAM @ NATHI & ANR.              ..... Petitioners
                    Represented by: Mr.D.K.Sharma, Advocate.

                          Versus

       THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD & ORS. .... Respondents
                     Represented by: None.


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

CM No.16923/2013 (for exemption)

Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.

CM (M) No.1154/2013

1. The present petition is filed against the impugned order dated 17.11.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has modified the directions passed in the award dated 19.10.2011.

2. Vide order dated 19.10.2011, while granting compensation, the learned Tribunal has directed as under:-

"32. So far as the liability to pay the compensation is concerned, it is primary duty of R1 and R2 being driver and

owner of offending vehicle and R3 being insurer of the offending vehicle is vicariously liable to pay compensation for the damages suffered by the petitioner. Since offending vehicle was duly insured with R3 on the date of the accident and R1 was having valid and effective D/L, therefore, R3 is liable to pay the compensation. This issue is decided accordingly."

3. Thereafter, on an application being filed by the respondent Insurance Company, the learned Tribunal has passed the impugned order dated 17.11.2011, which reads as under:-

"Heard and perused the award dated 19.10.11.

In my view of findings on issue no.2, R3 was not liable to pay compensation. Therefore, I am of the view that findings on issue no.2 could not be considered accidentally while deciding liability to pay compensation in para 32 of the award and therefore, R3 was, accidentally and wrongly held liable to pay compensation. Now it is corrected in para 32 of the award that R1 was not having valid and effective DL on the date of accident and R3 is not liable to pay compensation. Consequently R1 and R2 are held, jointly and severally, liable to pay compensation and directed to comply the award by depositing the cheques in the name of petitioners as mentioned in the award. Application is accordingly disposed. Copy of this order be given to parties for compliances."

4. I note, even notice had not been issued to the petitioners and the directions passed in the award dated 19.10.2011 have been reversed vide impugned order dated 17.11.2011 noted above.

5. In view of the above, I am of the considered view that the aforesaid order dated 17.11.2011 deserves to be set aside as the same has been passed without affording any opportunity to the petitioners.

6. Ordered accordingly.

7. Consequently, the learned Tribunal is directed to hear both the parties and pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

8. Parties are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 12.11.2013 for directions.

9. A copy of this order be given dasti to the learned counsel for the petitioners under the signature of the Court Master.

10. The Registry of this Court is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned Tribunal for compliance.

11. The instant petition stands disposed of in view of the above. CM No.16922/2013 (for exemption)

With the disposal of the petition itself, this application has become infructuous. The same is accordingly disposed of.

SURESH KAIT, J.

OCTOBER 28, 2013 sb