The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Smt. Savita Sahu Golhani
2023 Latest Caselaw 1537 MP

                                                       1
                           IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                              AT JABALPUR
                                                   BEFORE
                                HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA
                                           ON THE 27 th OF JANUARY, 2023
                                            MISC. APPEAL No. 1857 of 2012

                          BETWEEN:-
                          THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. DEPUTY
                          MANAGER 1516 NAPIER TOWN, KR. BARAT ROAD,
                          RUSSEL CROSSING JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                .....PETITIONER
                          (BY SHRI CHOUDHARY RAHUL SINGH - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    SMT. SAVITA SAHU GOLHANI W/O LATE GOLU @
                                GHANSHYAM SAHU, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,
                                GRAM GHANSOR, THANA BARGI, TAHSIL AND
                                DISTT. JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    KU. SURBHI SAHU GOLHANI D/O LATE GOLU @
                                GHANSHYAM SAHU, AGED ABOUT 2 YEARS,
                                OCCUPATION: MINOR THROUGH MOTHER SMT.
                                SAVITA SAHU GRAM GHANSOR, THANA BARGI,
                                TEHSIL & DISTT. JABALPUR, M.P. (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          3.    SMT. PREMVATI SAHU GOLHANI W/O LATE
                                SURESH SAHU, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, GRAM
                                GHANSOR, THANA BARGI, TEHSIL & DISTT.
                                JABALPUR, M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          4.    SANDEEP SINGH S/O BADRI SINGH, AGED ABOUT
                                24 YEARS, FAZALGANJ, WARD NO. 4 UMARIA PALI
                                ROAD, UMARIA, M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          5.    BADRI   SINGH    S/O   JAGANNATH  SINGH
                                FAZALGANJ, WARD NO. 4 UMARIA PALI ROAD,
                                UMARIA, M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                              .....RESPONDENTS
                          (NONE FOR RESPONDENTS)

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VINAY KUMAR
BURMAN
Signing time: 31-Jan-23
12:28:47 PM
                                                               2
                                T h is appeal coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
                          following:
                                                               ORDER

This miscellaneous appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act has been filed by the Isurance Company against the award dated 01.05.2012 passed by the 10th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur in Claim Case No.208/2011.

2. Since the factum of accident is not in dispute, therefore, it is sufficient to mention here that Golu @ Ghanshyam Sahu lost his life in a vehicular accident, which took place on 06.03.2010.

3. The claims Tribunal by the impugned award came to a conclusion that there was a breach of permit but applied the principle of pay and recover. In the light of judgment passed by this Court in the case of Mithilesh Gurjar v. Santosh Pal reported in (2021) ACJ 375 the question is no more res integra.

4. In case of lack of permit, the principle of pay and recover can be applied and therefore, solitary ground raised by the petitioner does not survive.

5. The respondents have also filed their cross objection. Neither the valuation has been done nor the court fee has been paid. Accordingly, this Court was inclined to grant a weeks time to the counsel for the claimants to value the cross objection and to pay the court fee accordingly.

6. It is submitted by the counsel for the claimants that he do not wish to amend the cause title and is not in a position to pay the court fee.

7. Once, this Court had granted an opportunity to the claimant to value the cross objection as well as to pay the court fee and the said opportunity has

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINAY KUMAR BURMAN Signing time: 31-Jan-23 12:28:47 PM

been declined by the claimants, therefore, the cross objection filed by the claimants is hereby dismissed as under valued as well as on the ground of deficit court fee.

8. For the reasons mentioned above, the award dated 01.05.2012 passed in Claim Case No.208/2011 is hereby affirmed.

9. The appeal as well as the cross objection are hereby dismissed.

(G.S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE vinay*

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINAY KUMAR BURMAN Signing time: 31-Jan-23 12:28:47 PM