Karan Singh vs Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd
2022 Latest Caselaw 14397 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2126/2022

Karan Singh S/o Manohar Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o B- 649, Back Side Of Hanuman Mandir, Azar Nagar, Bhilwara.

----Appellant Versus

1. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Through Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Company, Bhilwara.

2. Smt. Usha Kacholiya W/o Naresh Kacholiya, B/c Kacholiya And R/o Kacholiya Building, Pratap Tokies Road, Bhilwara.

3. Naresh Kumar S/o Chitarmal Kacholiya, B/c Kacholiya And R/o Kacholiya Building, Pratap Tokies Road, Bhilwara.

4. National Insurance Company Ltd., Through Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company, Bhilwara.

5. Ashok S/o Nandlal Maniyar, B/c Maniyar And R/o B-362, R.k. Colony, Bhilwara, Dist. Bhilwara.

6. Smt. Chanda D/o Nandlal Maniyar, B/c Maniyar And R/o B-362, R.k. Colony, Bhilwara, Dist. Bhilwara.

                                                                ----Respondents


For Appellant(s)         :     Mr. Sandeep Sarupria
For Respondent(s)        :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

Order

07/12/2022

IA No.1/2022:

For the reasons stated, the application under Section 151 of

the CPC read with Section 173 of the MV Act, is allowed.

The appellant is exempted to deposit Rs.25,000/- under

Section 173 of the MV Act.

SBCMA No.2126/2022:

(2 of 2) [CMA-2126/2022]

In view of the reply to the defects pointed out by the

Registry, the defects pointed out by the Registry is waived and the

present appeal is treated to be filed within limitation.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that

only on the basis of the Naksha Mauka report, the learned tribunal

gave finding that there was contributory negligence, whereas as

per the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case

of Mangla Ram Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd & Ors

reported in 2018 ACJ 1300 and as per the judgment of this court

delivered in the case of United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs.

Smt. Sugni Devi & Ors reported in 2013 RAR 21 (Raj.), the site

plan could not be relied for conclusion of contributory negligence.

Matter requires consideration.

Admit. Issue notice. Issue notice of the stay application

also, returnable within six weeks.

Till then, the respondent no.4 is restrained from recovering

the award amount to the extent of 60% from the appellant.

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J 112-CPGoyal/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)