Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Ghulam Hassan Shergujree vs United India Insurance Company Limited ... on 4 August, 2022
Author: Ali Mohammad Magrey
Bench: Ali Mohammad Magrey
Serial No. 01
Regular Causelist
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
CM No. 1672/2021
In RP No. 26/2021
CM No. 1673/2021
Ghulam Hassan Shergujree.
..... Petitioner(s)
Through: -
Mr. N. A. Shalla, Advocate.
V/s
United India Insurance Company Limited & Ors.
..... Respondent(s)
Through: -
Ms. Rifat Khalida, Advocate.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
ORDER
04.08.2022 CM No. 1672/2021:
Mr. N. A. Shalla, Advocate for applicant/petitioner. Ms. Rifat Khalida, Advocate for non-applicants/respondents.
On the set of facts and the grounds urged, coupled with submissions made at Bar, the instant application is allowed and the delay caused in filing the review petition is condoned. CM is disposed of.
RP No. 26/2021; CM No. 1673/2021:
Mr. N. A. Shalla, Advocate for petitioner.
Ms. Rifat Khalida, Advocate for respondents.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the matter. On the grounds raised in the review petition coupled with submissions made, the Court is not inclined to recall the order of which review is sought, as the finding recorded or granting of recovery right to the Insurance Company is based on the records.
Learned counsel for the review petitioner submits that the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Srinagar, had not given any liberty to the Insurance Company for recovery of the award amount in tune with the settlement of issues raised. It is submitted that because of absence of review petitioner on account of him attending his ailing mother who was suffering from serious ailment (CA), he could not appear before the court and take the stand that review petitioner is not liable to make any payments on account of recovery in terms of settled position of law.
In view of the contentions raised, submissions made and the grounds urged, the Court is of the considered view that no review lies against order dated 20.09.2017, as there is no error apparent on the face of the record.
Notwithstanding the observations made hereinabove, the review petitioner shall take all the grounds in opposition of the recovery proceeding made by the Insurance Company before the competent court and the court shall consider all the contentions raised on merits. It is further made clear that merely because the Insurance Company has been given right of recovery, does not mean that same will be allowed without deciding the claim on its merits.
Dispose of as above along with connected CM(s).
(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR:
04.08.2022 "Hamid"ABDUL HAMID BHAT 2022.08.05 10:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document