Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramkishun Adiwasi vs Ramsurat Yadav on 16 October, 2023
Author: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 16 th OF OCTOBER, 2023
MISC. APPEAL No. 1065 of 2016
BETWEEN:-
1. RAMKISHUN ADIWASI S/O LATE RAMNATH
ADIWASI, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, VILLAGE
GADARGAWAN (KOTHA TOLA) POST SARUI P.S.
JANEH TAHSIL TEONTHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SONIYA ADIWASI W/O RAMKISHUN ADIWASI,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, VILLAGE GADARGAWAN
(KOTHA TOLA) POST SARUI P.S. JANEH TAHSIL
TEONTHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI ARUBENDRA SINGH PARIHAR - ADVOCATE FOR THE
APPELLANTS)
AND
1. RAMSURAT YADAV S/O SHRI S.P. YADAV VILLAGE
GADARGAWAN POST SARUI P.S. JANEH TEHSIL
TEONTHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. BALKARAN YADAV S/O RAMSURAT YADAV, AGED
ABOUT 32 YEARS, VILLAGE GADARGAWAN
(KOTHA TOLA) POST SARUI P.S. JANEH TAHSIL
TEONTHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. / SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LATD,
REGISTERED OFFICE, E-8, E.P.I.P, SITAPUR JAIPUR
(RAJASTHAN)
4. / RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
LIMITED 2ND FLOOR, 23 M.G.MARG, CIVIL LINES
, ALLAHABAD (UTTAR PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY MS. ANUSHRI CHOURASIYA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.3)
(BY SHRI T.S. LAMBA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.4)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MOHD TABISH
KHAN
Signing time: 10/17/2023
3:20:32 PM
2
This appeal coming on for I.A. as well as on admission this day, the
court passed the following:
ORDER
Heard on I.A. No.13519/2023, an application for amendment in cross-
objection under Order 6 Rule 17 of C.P.C.
This application is filed on 24.08.2023. As per order-sheet dated
21.03.2023 passed by a Coordinate Bench, taking this fact into consideration
that respondent No.3 had entered his appearance on 17th Day of August, 2016
by filing Vakalatnama but a cross-objection was filed on 07.11.2016 and also
taking this fact into consideration that cross-objection is to be filed within a
period of 30 days from the date of receipt of notice of appeal, but Coordinate
Bench noted a fact that since appeal was admitted on 21.03.2023 treated the
cross-objection to be within a period of limitation. Thereafter if any amendment
application was to be filed in the cross-objection it could have been filed within
30 days of admission of the appeal and not beyond it.
No reason is given in this I.A. for condonation of delay. Delay for
condonation in filing the application is not there, nothing is mentioned about the
delay in the affidavit filed by one Shri R.K. Jain, Advocate.
It is a strange phenomena that in place of affidavit of the Officer of the
company, counsel chooses to file his affidavit that shows their commitment
towards the company but that cannot take away the legal provision that the
party who is seeking condonation of delay should have moved an application
under the affidavit of that party. Therefore, application on the aspect of being
not supported within an affidavit of the Officer of the Insurance Company and
also on the ground that there is no proper reason for seeking condonation of
delay is hereby rejected.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MOHD TABISH
KHAN
Signing time: 10/17/2023
3:20:32 PM
Learned counsel for appellants/claimants submits that he has paid deficit
Court fee in the appeal filed by the claimants and in support of the said
submission, he has filed a copy of Online Court Fees Cyber Receipt of
Rs.5,700/- along with covering memo, therefore, the Court fee may be taken on
record.
On due consideration, the deficit Court fee is taken on record.
As far as merit is concerned, this appeal is filed by the claimants being
aggrieved of award dated 06.01.2016 passed by the learned Additional Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Teothar, District Rewa in Claim Case No.27/2014 on
the ground that for a death of 13 years old boy Kanhaiyalal Adiwasi only a sum
of Rs.1,32,500/- is awarded by the Tribunal.
Placing reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of
Meena Devi Vs. Nunu Chand Mahto and Others, (2023) 1 SCC 204,
which has been followed by this Court in M.A. No.7/2020 decided on
27.06.2023 (Rajkumar Adiwasi and Others Vs. Ramesh Kumar Patel and
Others), claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-.
Therefore, there will be addition of Rs.3,67,500/- (Rupees Three Lacs
Sixty Seven Thousand Five Hundred Only) which will be admissible in favour
of the claimants. This additional amount will also earn interest @6% from the
date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. Other terms
and conditions of the award shall remain intact.
The enhanced amount along with interest accrued thereon shall remain
invested in the Monthly Income Scheme of the Indian Post Office or a
Nationalized Bank for a period of ten years. The claimants will be entitled to
utilize its monthly interest for their well being and maintenance, but the principal
amount will not be allowed to be withdrawn for the aforesaid period.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MOHD TABISH
KHAN
Signing time: 10/17/2023
3:20:32 PM
It is directed that liability will be of the owner, driver and the Shriram
General Insurance Company Limited as Reliance General Insurance Company
is already exonerated by the High Court vide order dated 21.03.2023 in M.A.
No.894/2016 (Reliance General Insurance Company Vs. Ramkishan Adiwasi
and others).
In above terms, this appeal is disposed of.
Record of the Tribunal be sent back immediately.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK AGARWAL)
JUDGE
Tabish
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MOHD TABISH
KHAN
Signing time: 10/17/2023
3:20:32 PM
