Murlidhar vs Asha Ram And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 5026 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 584/2010

Murlidhar

----Appellant Versus Asha Ram And Anr.

----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Kailash Trivedi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dhanpat Choudhary

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

Order

04/04/2022

IA NO. 1/21

Heard, learned counsel for the parties on application filed

under Order 10 (2) read with Section 151 of C.P.C.

Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant submits that

while allowing the application, the service upon

respondent(owner) may be dispensed with.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Insurance

Company vehemently opposed the application filed by the

appellant seeking dispensing with the service upon respondent-

Owner.

Learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company

submits that if the impugned judgment and award dated

04.02.2010 is seen, then its amply clear that the learned Tribunal

has directed the respondent-Owner to indemnify the awarded

amount of Rs. 23,951/-. It is also submitted that though the

learned Tribunal has directed to pay the awarded amount to the

(2 of 2) [CMA-584/2010]

appellant-claimants, but at the same time, the learned Tribunal

has also given liberty to the respondent-Insurance Company to

recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle,

therefore, it is prayed that the application filed by the appellant

seeking to dispense with the service upon respondent-owner,

deserves to be rejected.

Having considered the rival submissions of the learned

counsel for the parties and after perusing the record, this Court

does not deem it appropriate to allow the application filed under

Order 10(2) read with Section 151 of C.P.C. because firstly the

learned Tribunal directed the respondent-owner to indemnify the

award amount & secondly the liberty is granted to respondent-

Insurance Company to recover the same from the respondent-

owner, and therefore, the respondent-owner is proper and

necessary party in the present lis.

In view of the above, the application (IA No. 1/21) is

rejected.

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J 30-neha/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)