Branch Manager vs Poonam Devi & Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 417 Jhar

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                               M.A. No. 143 of 2020
                                        ----

Branch Manager, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd., through its Legal Manager Amit Jaiswal ... Appellant

-versus-

            Poonam Devi & Others                   ...  Respondents
                                          ----

               CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN
                   THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING
                                            ----

            For the Appellant:      Mr. Nikhil Ranjan, Advocate
            For the Respondents:
                                           ----
4/ 11.02.2022     I.A. No.7232 of 2021

In this interlocutory application, appellant Insurance Company prays to stay the execution proceeding in Misc. Execution Case No.06 of 2021, which has been initiated by the claimants to execute the award dated 23.12.2019 passed in Motor Accident Claim Case No.192 of 2018.

Counsel for the appellant submits that as per the claimants, deceased was Khalashi of the vehicle, which met with the accident, but, as per the policy, Khalashi was not covered. He submits that it is only the driver, who was covered. He submits that the Tribunal did not consider the document and the evidence, which also suggests that in fact, it was the deceased, who was the Khalashi, was unauthorisedly driving the vehicle at the relevant point of time, which met with accident. Later he died. He submits that the deceased was actually driving the vehicle without valid licence, but, only for the purpose of claiming compensation, he has been shown to be Khalashi. In both the situations, the amount of compensation has to be paid by the owner of the vehicle. This fact has not been considered, thus, is a main ground of appeal. He also submits that salary of the deceased has been taken as Rs.8,000/- per month, which is absolutely on the higher side. He submits that the award needs to be stayed as an order of attachment has been issued in the execution case. He submits that if the amount is directed to be paid, then the same cannot be recovered from the claimants.

After hearing the counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company, I find that in the event if the appeal is allowed based on the contentions of the appellant, in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, at best, it

can be held that there was a violation of the policy. If that be so, the Insurance Company will have to satisfy the award and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle.

Considering the aforesaid fact, I do not find any ground to stay the execution proceeding in Misc. Execution Case No.06 of 2021. This interlocutory application is, thus, dismissed.

(Ananda Sen, J.) Kumar/Cp-02