Sunday, 17, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Mangaram vs Monika Devi (2025:Rj-Jd:14452)
2025 Latest Caselaw 8949 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 8949 Raj
Judgement Date : 18 March, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Mangaram vs Monika Devi (2025:Rj-Jd:14452) on 18 March, 2025

Author: Rekha Borana
Bench: Rekha Borana
[2025:RJ-JD:14452]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                  S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1488/2022

1.       Mangaram S/o Hukmanram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
         Village Bhinchawa, Tehsil Makrana, Distt. Nagaur. (Driver
         Tractor No. Rj 01 R 1663)
2.       Sukharam S/o Chandraram, Aged About 47 Years, R/o
         Village Kalwa Bada Bas, Tehsil Makrana, Distt. Nagaur.
         (Owner Tractor No. Rj 01 R 1663)
                                                                        ----Appellants
                                       Versus
1.       Monika Devi W/o Late Moolaram, R/o Samasya Bera,
         Village Bhinchawa, Tehsil Makrana, Distt. Nagaur.
2.       Devendra S/o Late Moolaram, R/o Samasya Bera, Village
         Bhinchawa, Tehsil Makrana, Distt. Nagaur.
3.       Komal D/o Late Moolaram, R/o Samasya Bera, Village
         Bhinchawa, Tehsil Makrana, Distt. Nagaur.
4.       Harshita D/o Late Moolaram, R/o Samasya Bera, Village
         Bhinchawa, Tehsil Makrana, Distt. Nagaur.
5.       Dularam S/o Late Rugharam, R/o Samasya Bera, Village
         Bhinchawa, Tehsil Makrana, Distt. Nagaur.
6.       Heera Devi W/o Dularam, R/o Samasya Bera, Village
         Bhinchawa, Tehsil Makrana, Distt. Nagaur.
7.       United      India   Insurance         Co.     Ltd.,        Through   Regional
         Manager, Regional Office, Panchatti Circle, Sardulganj,
         Bikaner. (Insurance Company)
                                                                      ----Respondents


For Appellant(s)             :     Mr. Bharat Shrimali



              HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

18/03/2025

1. The present appeal has been filed by the driver and owner of

the vehicle in question against the judgment and award dated

25.04.2022 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Deedwana,

[2025:RJ-JD:14452] (2 of 3) [CMA-1488/2022]

District Nagaur in Motor Accident Claim Case No.08/2016 whereby

the learned Tribunal while awarding the compensation to the tune

of Rs.12,31,648/- in favour of the claimants although directed the

Insurance Company to deposit a cheque/DD qua the

compensation amount but then, held it entitled to recover the

same from non-claimants No.1 & 2 i.e. the driver and owner of the

vehicle in question.

2. It is the said direction to 'Pay and Recover' that is under

challenge in the present appeal by the driver and owner of the

vehicle.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned

Tribunal although decided Issue No.2 against the Insurance

Company and held it liable to pay the compensation amount but

then, erroneously observed that the Insurance Company shall be

entitled to recover the compensation amount from the appellants.

4. Counsel submits that there being no finding to that aspect,

the direction to 'Pay and Recover' is totally erroneous and contrary

to law.

5. Heard the counsel and perused the impugned judgment and

award as well as the Insurance Policy and Statements as placed

on record today by learned counsel for the appellants. The same

are taken on record.

6. A bare perusal of the Insurance Policy (Exhibit NA-1) reflects

that the same is a 'Liability only Policy'. The said policy does not

cover the risk of any of the occupants of the vehicle including the

owner or the driver. The same evidently covers the risk only of a

third party.

[2025:RJ-JD:14452] (3 of 3) [CMA-1488/2022]

7. True it is that the learned Tribunal has not recorded any

finding to the above aspect and has proceeded on to decide Issue

No.2 against the Insurance Company but then, this Court cannot

be oblivious of the fact which is crystal clear on record that the

policy in question is a 'Liability only Policy'.

8. In view of the above facts, the direction as issued by the

learned Tribunal holding the Insurance Company entitled to

recover the compensation amount from the owner cannot be

termed to be erroneous or bad in law. Even otherwise, it is only

the Insurance Company which could have been aggrieved of the

finding as recorded on Issue No.2. The appellant-owner/driver can

definitely not take any advantage of the finding which is erroneous

on the face of it.

9. No case for interference to the extent of the direction to 'Pay

and Recover' is made out and appeal is hence, dismissed.

10. Stay petition and pending applications, if any, stand

disposed of.

(REKHA BORANA),J 7-AbhishekK/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter