Himachal Pradesh High Court
The New India Assurance Company Limited vs Raj Kumar I And Others on 10 August, 2018
Author: Sanjay Karol
Bench: Sanjay Karol
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
CMPMO No.5 of 2018 .
Decided on : August 10, 2018 The New India Assurance Company Limited .... Petitioner Versus Raj Kumar i and others .... Respondents The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice . Whether approved for reporting? No 1 For the Petitioner : Mr. Praneet Gupta, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Addl. A.G. and Ms. Svaneel Jaswal, Dy. A.G. for the State.
r Mr. Romesh Verma, Advocate for R-1 to R-3.
Mr. Y.P. Sood, Advocate for R-6.
Mr. Mohan Singh and Sanjay Kumar, Advocates for R-7.
Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice (oral) Records reveals that the present petitioner had, in fact, filed response to the application for setting aside award dated 19.2.2010, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court, Shimla, in MAC No.31-10 of 2008, titled as Raj Kumari and others vs. The New India Assurance Company Ltd. and others.
2. It is for this reason that this Court arises at the conclusion that reasons arrived at, which weighed with the Tribunal in allowing the application, are perverse and erroneous. As such, on this short ground alone, order dated 18.11.2017, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
::: Downloaded on - 14/08/2018 22:59:07 :::HCHP 2(IV), Shimla, H.P, in Case No.4-S/10 of 2010, titled as Raj Kumari and others vs. The New India Assurance Company Ltd.
.
and others, is quashed and set aside, with the matter being remanded back to the Tribunal.
3. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 21.8.2018. The application is revived. The Tribunal shall decide the application in question afresh, after affording due opportunity of hearing to all concerned. This , Tribunal shall positively do, within a period of four weeks thereafter. Parties undertake to fully cooperate and not take any unnecessary adjournments. Needless to add, parties have been litigating since the year 2008 and if the Tribunal were to allow the applic ation, the main petition would be decided expeditiously and preferably within a period of six months thereafter.
With the aforesaid observations, present petition stands disposed of, so also, pending application(s), if any.
Copy Dasti.
(Sanjay Karol), August 10, 2018 (KS) Acting Chief Justice ::: Downloaded on - 14/08/2018 22:59:07 :::HCHP