Delhi High Court
Icici Lombard General Insurance ... vs Sh. Vijay Kumar & Ors on 23 May, 2014
Author: Suresh Kait
$~28
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 23rd May, 2014
+ CM(M)522/2014
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
THROUGH MANAGER-LEGAL ..... Petitioner
Represented by: Ms. Manjusha Wadhwa and
Ms. Sony Kumar, Advs.
versus
SH. VIJAY KUMAR & ORS ..... Respondents
Represented by: NEMO.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
CM. No. 9081/2014
Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
+ CM(M) 522/2014
1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner/Insurance Company is seeking
direction for setting aside the impugned orders dated 29.01.2014 and
23.04.2014 whereby Ld. Tribunal has directed the petitioner to pay
Rs.11,000/- to respondent no. 1 and dismissed the application for waiver of
cost, respectively.
2. I note, vide order dated 10.10.2011, Ld. Tribunal directed the DCP
(Central) to conduct an enquiry regarding the fake insurance cover note,
through SHO, PS-Patel Nagar, New Delhi. It was further directed that the
investigation shall be conducted by an official not below the rank of Sub-
Inspector and also directed that the DCP shall file compliance report
regarding the registration of FIR and initiation of investigation within 15
days.
3. It is pertinent to mention here that vide the aforesaid order, the award
was passed in favour of the claimant. Accordingly, respondent nos. 1 and 2,
i.e., the driver and owner of the offending vehicle was directed to pay the
award amount.
4. I further note that there is no direction issued to the petitioner to
comply the order or to file any document on record. However, vide order
dated 29.01.2014, Ld. Tribunal passed an order as under:
"For the last several dates this case is pending for placing on
record copy of FIR by the Insurance Company but either the
Insurance Company is too busy or intentionally ignoring the
directions of this Court. Today Sh. R.K. Gupta, Ld. Counsel
for the Insurance Company has undertaken to place on record
certified copy of FIR within 10 days from today.
Now to come up on 26.02.2014 for placing on record certified
copy of FIR. If certified copy of FIR is not placed on record a
cost of Rs.11,000/- shall automatically get imposed on the
Insurance Company and if the same is not paid within 15 days
from the next date of hearing, recovery certificate for
realisation of the cost shall be issued and even then the
Insurance Company has to place on record certified copy of
FIR."
5. Thereafter, on application moved by the petitioner, vide order dated
23.04.2014, Ld. Tribunal passed an order as under:
"Ld. Counsel for the Insurance Company has placed on record
copy of FIR awaited since long. He has also today moved an
application for waiving off cost imposed on the insurance
company on the previous date of hearing with copy of the same
delivered to proxy counsel for Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.
Arguments on the aforesaid application have been heard and
previous orders of this court for imposition of cost has been
carefully perused. There are no merits in the application in
hand and hence the same is dismissed.
Now to come up on 21.05.2014 for payment of cost by an
account payee cheque payable to the injured Sh. Vijay
Kumar."
6. It is not clear from the aforesaid orders as to why the petitioner was
directed to file the FIR, whereas the DCP was directed to conduct an enquiry
on the fake Insurance Policy and was also directed to file a compliance
report regarding the registration of FIR and initiation of investigation within
15 days from the date of the order, i.e., 10.10.2011.
7. In view of above, orders dated 29.01.2014 and 23.04.2014 are set
aside.
8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed.
9. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Tribunal for information.
CM. NO. 9082/2014
With the disposal of the instant petition itself, instant application has
become infructuous and disposed of as such.
SURESH KAIT, J
MAY 23, 2014
jg
