AO/533/2019
2021 Latest Caselaw 1528 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                            COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures

                                  AO No.533 of 2019
                                  Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Mr. Mehboob Rahi, Advocate for the appellant.

None for the respondents.

This matter is being heard though video conferencing.

Summon the LCR.

Heard on Interim Relief Application (IA) No.16036 of 2021.

By means of the instant interim relief application, the appellant seeks in fact, stay of the operation of the recovery citation dated 10.03.2021. This stay application has been filed in the appeal which has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 11.09.2019, passed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 66 of 2018, Smt. Usha Rani and another Vs. Wajar Hussain and others. By the impugned judgment and order, the claim for `2,80,000/- was allowed. The insurance company was directed to make payment of the claim but, recover it from the appellant and Wajar Husain. In the impugned judgment and order, it was held that the driver of the vehicle did not have a valid driving license, therefore, the driver as well as the owner, who was appellant are liable to pay the amount to the insurance company. In fact, issue no.2 in the case, was with regard to validity of the driving license of the driver. The driving license was not produced during the hearing.

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that pursuant to the judgment and order dated 11.09.2019, it appears that insurance company has made payment to the claimant but, now execution proceedings have been filed by the insurance company for recovery of the amount from the appellant, who is owner of the vehicle.

It is submitted that the driver of the vehicle has valid driving license, which he could not produce during the time of hearing of the case. An application under Section 41 Rule 27 of the CPC, has been filed in the case. The instant appeal has yet to be heard. It is submitted that the claimants have received the money. The appellant did not produce driving license of the driver during the claim petition. It is proposed to be filed in the appeal by way of an application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC. Having considered all these facts, this Court does not see any reason to stay the proceedings. The stay application deserves to be dismissed and is dismissed accordingly.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 19.04.2021

Sanjay