SPA/4/2023
2023 Latest Caselaw 1047 UK

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                     AT NAINITAL


            THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI VIPIN SANGHI
                                   AND
                THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA




                     SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 04 OF 2023


                              19th APRIL, 2023


Between:


Bimla Nand Bahuguna                        ......            Appellant


and


Chairman Cum Managing Director,
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & others       ......            Respondents



Counsel for the appellant        :   Mr. Vinoda   Nand    Barthwal,   learned
                                     counsel

Counsel for the respondents      : --




The Court made the following:


JUDGMENT: (per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Vipin Sanghi)




             The present special appeal is directed against the

order dated 07.12.2022, dismissing the appellant's writ

petition, being Writ Petition (S/S) No. 2214 of 2022.
                              2



2)        The appellant was serving as Development Officer

with Oriental Insurance Company Limited. It was found that

he had issued a cover note in respect of an ill-fated bus

which met with an accident, after the said accident. On that

account, he was subjected to penalty. Eventually, that

penalty has been upheld not only by this Court, but even by

the Supreme Court.    The respondent then sought to make

recovery of rupees six lakhs odd from the appellant without

issuing a show cause notice. The petitioner was aggrieved

by the said action taken by the respondents, and approached

this Court by preferring Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1018 of

2020.   The said petition was disposed of on 23.11.2020,

directing the respondents to issue a show cause notice to the

petitioner, and to grant him time to respond to the same. In

compliance with the said order, the respondents issued a

show cause notice, and called for the appellant's reply, which

was given.    Thereafter, after considering the reply, the

respondents proceeded to issue the order impugned in the

writ petition dated 09.09.2022, upholding the recovery of

Rs.6,04,562/-. The impugned order dated 09.09.2022, also

observed that in reality only an amount of Rs. 3,43,560/-

has been deducted from the salary of the appellant at the

rate of Rs. 6,135/- per month, which was stopped from the

month of July 2014, due to stay order dated 27.06.2014, by
                              3



this Court, in Writ Petition (M/S) No 1481 of 2014.      Still,

recovery of Rs. 2,61,002/- was pending from the appellant.

Consequently, the refund sought by the appellant of the

recovery made from him was denied.        The learned Single

Judge has not found merit in the writ petition, in the

aforesaid light.



3)         Counsel for the appellant is not able to point out

any error in the impugned order.        The recovery of the

aforesaid amount was sought to be made, since the

respondent Insurance Company was saddled with liability to

that extent, at the instance of the insured. As the appellant

was solely responsible for issuance of the insurance policy

after the occurrence of the accident, the said liability would

fall on him, and the respondent is entitled to recover the

same.



4)         For the aforesaid reasons, we find no merit in this

appeal. The same is, accordingly, dismissed.




                                         _________________
                                         VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.



                                      _________________
                                     ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Dt: 19th APRIL, 2023 Negi