Madhya Pradesh High Court
The New India Assurance Company Limited vs Shri Devendra Prasad Pandey on 2 April, 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
ON THE 2 nd OF APRIL, 2024
MISC. APPEAL No. 2377 of 2015
BETWEEN:-
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
THROUGH ITS SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER
DIVISION OFFICE 290, NAPIER TOWN (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI PRANAY GUPTA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. SHRI DEVENDRA PRASAD PANDEY S/O SHRI
NARHAR PRASAD PANDEY, AGED ABOUT 48
YEAR S , VILLAGE CHANDWAHI PS AND TEH-
BAHRI (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SMT. ANANDKALI PANDEY W/O SHRI DEVENDRA
PRASAD PANDEY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O
VILLAGE CHANDWAHI, P.S. AND TEHSIL BAHRI,
DISTT. SIDHI (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. SHRI LAKHAN LAL KUSHWAHA S/O SHRI MOTI
LAL KUSHWAHA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O
VILLAGE PATHROHI, POST- AMARPUR P.S. AND
TEHSIL BAHRI, DISTT. SIDHI (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. SHRI SANTOSH KUMAR KUSHWAHA S/O SHRI
JETHHU @ CHAITU KUSHWAHA, AGED ABOUT 24
YEARS, R/O VILLAGE GODAHI, P.S. AND TEHSIL
BAHRI, DISTT. SIDHI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI BRAHMENDRA PATHAK, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1
&2)
This appeal coming on for final hearing this day, the court passed the
following:
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: LALIT SINGH
RANA
Signing time: 4/4/2024
4:37:05 PM
2
ORDER
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this appeal is heard
finally.
2. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been
filed by the appellant/insurance company against the judgment dated 28.08.2015
passed by the 2nd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sidhi in Claim
Case No. 298/2014 whereby learned tribunal has awarded an amount of
Rs.4,15,000/- to the claimant payable by the respondent No.3 and 4 i.e. driver
and owner of the offending vehicle and Insurance Company jointly and
severally.
3. Looking to the settled position, in the light of judgment by three judges
Bench in the case of Mukund Dewangan Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
(2017) 14 SCC 663, the points raised by the appellant-insurance company are
no more res-integra, without pressing for disposal of appeal on merit, learned
counsel for the appellant submits that court may pass appropriate order with a
direction to the learned claims tribunal that as and when the amount deposited
by the insurance company in the compliance of the award is disbursed to the
claimants/respondent No.1 and 2, appropriate surety may be taken from the
respondent No. 3 and 4 ( owner and driver of the offending vehicle) to protect
the interests of the insurance company.
4. Counsel for the claimants opposed the prayer of any direction to the
learned claims tribunal before disbursing the award amount to the
claimants/respondents No.1 and 2. Counsel further prays that in the light of
judgment in Mukund Dewangan (Supra) nothing remains to be adjudicated
and therefore, the appeal may be dismissed as having no substance.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the record,
it is found that learned tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.4,15,000/- to the
claimant payable by the respondent No.3 and 4 i.e. driver and owner of the
offending vehicle and Insurance Company jointly and severally. Learned
counsel for the appellant has fairly submitted that in the light of Mukund
Dewangan (supra), the contentions raised by the appellant are no more res-
integra.
6. In view of the aforesaid, the appeal being without any substance stands
dismissed with a direction that rest of the award amount will be deposited as
per direction in the impugned award within a period of 90 days before the
concerned tribunal. Learned claims tribunal may in its wisdom ask for surety
from owner and driver of the offending vehicle.
7. In the light of aforesaid discussion, this appeal being sans merit fails and is
hereby dismissed.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
RS
