Ku. Khushbu vs Ajay Jatav
2022 Latest Caselaw 15645 MP

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 15645 MP
Judgement Date : 28 November, 2022

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Ku. Khushbu vs Ajay Jatav on 28 November, 2022

Author: Deepak Kumar Agarwal

1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
ON THE 28th OF NOVEMBER, 2022

MISC. APPEAL No. 3623 of 2017

BETWEEN:-
KU. KHUSHBU D/O SHRI RAJU KHATIK, AGED
ABOUT 9 YEARS, MINOR U/G FATHER SHRI
RAJU KHATIK, R/O WARD NO. 13 BANMORE
DISTT. MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI KRIPAL SINGH BATHAM- ADVOCATE )

AND
1. AJAY JATAV S/O SHRI RAMKISHAN JATAV,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, R/O PANJAB AND
SINDH BANK KE SAMNE ETAVA ROAD BHIND
(MADHYA PRADESH)

2. AAKASH BATHAM S/O SHRI KRASHANA
KUMAR BATHAM R/O KRISHNAPURI MORAR
THANA MORAR DISTT. GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH)

3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. THROUGH
DIVISIONAL MANAGER OFFICE CENTER POINT
COMPLEX PHOOLBAAG, GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI NARESH SINGH TOMAR- ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT NO.3)

Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
following:
ORDER

Being aggrieved by the award passed by the 7th Motor Accident Claims Signature Not Verified Tribunal, Gwalior, in Claim Case No.20/2016 on 17.8.2017 appellant/claimant Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD Signing time: 30-11-2022 09:31:01 AM has preferred this appeal for enhancement.

I n brief, facts of the case are that on 1.9.2015 appellant, 9 years girl, along with her mother was standing at Pithanpura square near Shankarji Mandir by the side of road, at that juncture, respondent No.1 came by driving Tata Indica Car No.MP07-E-9302, which was in the ownership of respondent No.2 and insured with respondent No.3, rashly and negligently and dashed the appellant, her mother and others, due to which appellant received severe injuries at legs, head and other parts of her body. She was taken to Govt. Hospital, Bhind. Thereafter she was admitted in S.M.Hospital, Gwalior, where her leg was operated and nailing was done. A sum of Rs.50,000/- was spent on her treatment. Report of the accident was lodged at police Station, Pawai, Distt.

Bhind, on which crime No.80/2015 was registered against respondent No.1/driver of the offending vehicle. The appellant filed an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation and adduced evidence in support of her application. Learned Claims Tribunal after taking evidence of the parties, passed an award to the tune of Rs.55,000/- in favour of the appellant and directed Insurance Company to pay the said amount with liberty to recover the same from respondents No.1 & 2, however, that amount so deposited by the Insurance Company be disbursed only after furnishing security by the owner of the offending vehicle. Being dissatisfied, this appeal has been filed by the appellant.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and that appellant suffered supracondylar fracture of femur bone, a sum of Rs.50,000/- in lump sum is awarded in favour of the appellant in addition to the amount already Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal. The amount of compensation be Signing time: 30-11-2022 09:31:01 AM disbursed to the appellant in accordance with the directions of Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of Pramod Kumar Agrawal & Ors. vs. Mushtari Begum & Ors., 2004(3) T.A.C. 289 (S.C.) which are reproduced hereinbelow:-

Therefore, while upholding the judgment of the High Court we direct in terms of what has been stated in Baljit Kaur's case (supra) that the insurer shall pay the quantum of compensation fixed by the Tribunal, about which there was no dispute raised, to the respondents-claimants within three months from today. For the purpose of recovering the same from the owner the insurer shall not be required to file a suit. It may initiate a proceeding before the concerned Executing Court as if the dispute between the insurer and the owner was the subject matter of determination before the Tribunal and the issue is decided against the owner and in favour of the insurer. Before release of the amount to the claimants, owner of the vehicle i.e. appellant no.1 shall furnish security for the entire amount which the insurer will pay to the claimants. The offending vehicle shall be attached, as a part of the security. If necessity arises the Executing Court shall take assistance of the concerned Regional Transport Authority. The Executing Court shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as to the manner in which the owner of the vehicle i.e. appellant no.1 shall make payment to the insurer. In case there is any default it shall be open to the Executing Court to direct realization by disposal of the securities to be furnished or from any other property or properties of the owner of the vehicle, the insured (the appellant no.1).