Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd vs Krishna Devi And Ors on 22 December, 2020

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd vs Krishna Devi And Ors on 22 December, 2020

Bench: Sandeep Sharma

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
                                                    FAO Nos. 1 and 2 of 2015
                                                     Decided on: 22.12.2020




                                                                                .
    __________________________________________________________________





        1. FAO No. 1 of 2015
    Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.                                     ...........Appellant
                                   Versus
    Krishna Devi and Ors.                                                    ..........Respondents





        2. FAO No. 2 of 2015
    Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.                                     ...........Appellant
                                   Versus
    Smt. Narda Devi and Ors.                                                 ..........Respondents
    __________________________________________________________________





    Coram:
    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting? 1
    For the Appellant(s)                   :      Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate, in both
                           r                      the appeals.
    For the Respondents                    :      Mr. Deepak Kaushal, Advocate, for

                                                  respondents No. 1 to 3 in FAO No. 1 of
                                                  2015
                                                  Mr. K.D. Sood, Senior Advocate with Mr.
                                                  Sukrit Sood, Advocate, for respondent
                                                  No.4 in both the appeals.


                                                  Mr.    N.K.   Tomar,   Advocate,      for
                                                  respondent No.1 in FAO No. 2 of 2015.
    __________________________________________________________________




    Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):

Through Video Conferencing CMP No. 5586 of 2018 in FAO No. 1 of 2015 By way of instant application filed under Order 32 Rule 12, prayer has been made on behalf of the applicant/respondent No.2, for discharge of her guardian as she has attained majority. Learned counsel 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 22/12/2020 20:22:25 :::HCHP 2

representing the non-applicant/appellant states that he has no objection in case prayer made in the application is accepted.

Averments contained in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit as well as documents annexed therewith, clearly suggest that applicant/respondent No. 2 has attained majority and she is entitled to prosecute the case in her independent capacity.

In view of the above, the application is allowed and applicant/respondent No. 2 is allowed to prosecute the case in her own independent capacity and respondent No.1 Smt. Krishna Devi is discharged from her guardianship. Application stands disposed of.

FAO Nos. 1 and 2 of 2015 Learned counsel for the appellant(s) states that he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal(s).

Consequently, in view of the above, appeal(s) having been filed by the appellant(s) is dismissed as withdrawn. Interim order, if any, vacated.

CMP No. 5585 of 2018 in FAO No. 1 of 2015 By way of instant application filed under Section 151 CPC, prayer has been made on behalf of the applicant/respondent No.2, for release of the award amount lying deposited in the Registry of this court. Learned counsel representing the non-applicant/appellant fairly states that since appeal having been filed by the non-applicant/insurance company has been withdrawn, he shall have no objection in case prayer made in the application is allowed.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused material available on record, especially order passed in FAO No. 1 of 2015, whereby appeal having been filed by the appellant has been dismissed as withdrawn, this court sees no impediment in accepting the ::: Downloaded on - 22/12/2020 20:22:25 :::HCHP 3 prayer having been made by the applicant for release of award amount lying deposited in the Registry of this Court and accordingly, the .

application is allowed and Registry is directed to release the award amount in favour of the applicant strictly as per her share, by remitting the same in her saving bank account, detail whereof is mentioned in para-5 of the application, subject to verification by the Accounts Branch.

Since appeal having been filed by the non-

applicant/appellant has been dismissed as withdrawn vide instant order, amount falling in the shares of remaining non-applicants/respondents is also ordered to be released in their favour strictly as per their shares by remitting the same in their saving bank accounts, detail whereof shall be furnished by their respective counsel before the Registry within a period of two weeks from today. Application stands disposed of.

           22nd December, 2020                       (Sandeep Sharma),
              manjit                                       Judge








                                               ::: Downloaded on - 22/12/2020 20:22:25 :::HCHP

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Himachal Pradesh High Court