Narpat Ram vs Smt. Heero Devi
2022 Latest Caselaw 13596 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Cross Objection (Civil) No. 7/2022

1. Narpat Ram S/o Sh. Kala Ram, Aged About 32 Years, B/c Jat, R/o Dharasar, Baitu, Bhimji Tehsil Baitru, Distt. Barmer. (Driver)

2. Bala Ram S/o Sh. Lakha Ram, Aged About 62 Years, B/c Jat, R/o Dharasar, Baitu, Bhimji Tehsil Baitru, Distt. Barmer. (Vehicle Owner)

----Petitioners Versus

1. Smt. Heero Devi W/o Late Sh. Hukma Ram, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Bhimarlai Station, Tehsil Pachpadra, Distt. Barmer.

2. Prakash S/o Late Sh. Hukma Ram, Aged About 6 Years, Minor Is Through His Natural Mother, Smt. Heero Devi W/ o Late Sh. Hukma Ram. R/o Bhimarlai Station, Tehsil Pachpadra, Distt. Barmer.

3. Mula Ram S/o Late Sh. Nimba Ram, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Bhimarlai Station, Tehsil Pachpadra, Distt. Barmer.

4. Lakha Ram S/o Sh. Prahlad Ram, B/c Jat, R/o Dharasar, Baitu, Bhimji Tehsil Baitru, Distt. Barmer. (Vehicle Co- Owner/proforma Party)

5. Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, Through Its Divisional Manager, Division Officer Jodhpur. (Insurer)

----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 295/2012

1. Smt. Heero Devi W/o Late shri Hukamaram Age 27 years

2. Prakash S/o Late shri Hukamaram, Age 06 years

3. Mularam S/o Late shri Nimbaram Age 62 years All By caste Jaat, R/o Bhimarlaai Station,Tehsil-Pachpadra, District-Barmer, appellant No.2(Minor) is through his natural mother, Smt. Heero Devi(appellant No.1) W/o Late Sh. Hukma Ram

----Petitioner Versus

(2 of 4) [XOBJC-7/2022]

1. Narpat Ram S/o Sh. Kala Ram, aged about 32 years, by caste Jat, R/o Dharasar, Baitu, Bhimji Tehsil Baitru, District Barmer. (Driver)

2. Bala Ram S/o Sh. Lakha Ram, aged about 62 years, by Caste jat, R/o Dharasar, baitu, Bhimji, Tehsil Baitru, District Barmer. (vehicle Owner)

3. Lakha Ram S/o Sh. Prahlad Ram, By caste Jat, R/o Dharasar, baitu, Bhimji, Tehsil Baitru, District Barmer (Vehicle Co-owner) / Proforma Party

4. Reliance General Insurance Company Limited through its Divisional Manager, Division Officer Jodhpur (Insurer)

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. D.S. Gaur For Respondent(s) : Mr. TRS Sodha Mr. KC Choudhary

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

Judgment

Date of Judgment : 21/11/2022

S.B. Cross Objection (Civil) No. 7/2022:-

The present Civil Cross Objection under Order 41 Rule 22

CPC has been preferred by the cross-objector-respondents-owner

& driver against the findings recorded by the learned Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal, Barmer, District-Barmer in Claim Case

No.205/2009, while deciding issue No.3, whereby the learned

Tribunal exonerated the Insurance company from its liability.

Learned counsel appearing for the cross-objector-

respondents-owner & driver submits that the burden was on the

Insurance Company to prove the fact that the tractor attached

with trolley was used for "non-agricultural use" by adducing

evidence in this regard. In defence, the respondent-Insurance

Company submitted that the tractor was fitted with trolley and

(3 of 4) [XOBJC-7/2022]

was running on the date of accident and therefore, there was a

violation of policy condition.

Learned counsel appearing for the parties are in agreement

that the objection raised by the cross-objectors-respondents-

owner & driver is no more res integra in view of the judgment

delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of Mukund

Dewangan Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Limited(Civil Appeal

No.5826/2011) decided on 03.07.2017.

In view of the above, the present Cross-Ojection is allowed

and the findings arrived at by the learned Tribunal in relation to

exoneration of Insurance Company from its liability, is quashed

and set aside.

IA No.1/22, In S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 295/2012:-

For the reasons stated, the application under Order 22

Rule 4 read with Section 151 of the CPC for deleting the name

of appellant No.4-Rani Devi, is allowed.

The name of appellant No.4-Rani Devi is deleted from the

array of the parties.

S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 295/2012:-

The instant Civil Misc. Appeal has been filed by the

appellant-claimants against the judgment and award dated

09.09.2011 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal, Barmer, District-Barmer whereby the learned Tribunal

has awarded the compensation of Rs.5,98,000/- in favour of the

appellants-claimants.

During the pendency of the appeal, both the parties, i.e,

appellants-claimants and respondent-Insurance company have

(4 of 4) [XOBJC-7/2022]

mutually settled the amount of compensation and pray to

decide the appeal in the spirit of Lok Adalat.

In the spirit of Lok Adalat and with the consent of counsel

of the parties, the amount of compensation is further enhanced

by Rs.2,75,000/- lump sum in addition to the compensation

already awarded to the claimants.

If the enhanced amount is not paid within the stipulated

time, then the Insurance company is directed to pay interest at

the rate of 7% p.a. over and above the enhanced amount from

the date of this order.

The enhanced amount shall be deposited in the saving

account of the claimants, details of which shall be furnished by

the claimants before the Tribunal. Upon depositing the aforesaid

enhanced amount of Rs.2,75,000/- by Insurance Company, the

same shall be disbursed to the appellants-claimants

immediately and the entire claim of the claimants shall be

deemed to be satisfied.

In view of the above, the present appeal is disposed of.

Record of the learned Tribunal received, if any, be sent

back forthwith.

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J 79-neha/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)