Satya Narayan Son Of Shri Kharbuja vs The H.D.F.C. Irgo General ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 363 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 22025/2018


Satya Narayan Son Of Shri Kharbuja
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
The H.d.f.c. Irgo General Insurance Company Limited
                                                                  ----Respondent

Connected With

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10513/2019 Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd.

----Petitioner

Versus

Smt. Kavita Agarwal W/o Late Sunil Kumar Agarwal

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Sandeep Mathur, Adv. with Mr.Prabhansh Sharma, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr.Nikhil Simlote for Income Tax Department.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

Order

18/01/2021

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

controversy in the present petitions is squarely covered by the

decision rendered by the Gujarat High Court in the case of

Hansaguri Prafulchandra Ladhani & Ors. vs. Oriental

Insurance Company Limited [ACTC 2008(2) Page 820],

New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Bhoyabhai

Haribhai Bharvad & Ors. decided on 08.08.2016 reported in

(2 of 3) [CW-22025/2018]

MACD 2017(4) (Guj.) 1997 and the judgment passed by the

Bombay High Court in the case of Gauri Deepak Patel and Ors.

vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. reported in (2011 ACJ

1782).

Learned counsel also places reliance on a judgment

passed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in M.P. No.

6637/2019 Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Smt. Kala Bai &

Others decided on 20.03.2020.

Learned counsel further submitted that the Apex Court

in the case of Rama Bai & Ors. vs. Commissioner of Income

Tax, A.P. Hyderabad & Ors. 1990 (Supp.) SCC 699 has taken

a view that the interest which is granted as a compensation

cannot be said to be accrued on the date of order of the Court

granting enhanced compensation but has to be taken as having

accrued year after year from the date of passing of the order.

Learned counsel Mr.Nikhil Simlote submits that Section

145A (b) has been amended after judgment passed by the Apex

Court in the case of Rama Bai (supra), this has been observed by

the Bombay High Court in the case of Rupesh Rashmikant Shah

vs. Union of India & Ors. [(2019)417 ITR 169 (Bom.)] and

as such, this provision is required to be considered.

Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.Sandeep Mathur

wants some time to see the relevant provisions of Income Tax Act

to make submission.

Learned counsel for the respondent- Oriental Insurance

Company is not available today through Video Conferencing.

List on 08.02.2021 after showing name of Mr.Prabhansh

Sharma in the cause-list as counsel for the respondent (SBCWP

No.10513/2019).

(3 of 3) [CW-22025/2018]

Learned counsel for the petitioner is also free to move

an application for impleadment the Income Tax Department as

party respondent in the writ petition.

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR), J

Himanshu Soni/26-27/Ramesh Vaishnav

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)