Himachal Pradesh High Court
Laxmi Bhardwaj vs Lalit Kumar And Others on 18 September, 2015
Author: Mansoor Ahmad Mir
Bench: Mansoor Ahmad Mir
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
FAO No.281 of 2008
Decided on: 18.09.2015
.
Laxmi Bhardwaj .....Appellant
Versus
Lalit Kumar and others ..... Respondents
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice
Whether approved for reporting? Yes.
of
For the appellant: Mr.Suneet Goel, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr.V.S. Chauhan, Advocate, for
rt respondent No.1.
Nemo for respondents No.2 and 3.
_____________________________________________________________________
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (oral)
This appeal is directed against the award, dated 31st March, 2008, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-I, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P., (for short, the Tribunal), in Claim Petition No.32-MAC/2 of 2005, titled Lalit Kumar vs. Laxmi Bhardwaj and others, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs.1,26,988/-, with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition till realization, came to be awarded in favour of the claimant (respondent No.1 herein) and the insured/appellant came to be saddled with the liability, (for short the impugned award).
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:58:15 :::HCHP...2...
2. The insurer, the driver and the claimant have not .
questioned the impugned award on any count, thus, the same has attained finality so far as it relates to them.
3. The insured/appellant has questioned the impugned award on the grounds taken in the memo of of appeal.
4. The main ground urged in the appeal was that the rt Tribunal has wrongly fastened the liability on the insured/appellant.
5. Therefore, on the last date of hearing, the learned counsel for the appellant/owner was asked to show whether the vehicle was insured at the relevant point of time and the insurer can be saddled with the liability. Today, the learned counsel for the appellant frankly conceded that he was not in a position to get the copy of the insurance policy. Therefore, no other conclusion can be drawn than the one taken by the Tribunal that the offending vehicle was not insured at the relevant point of time.
6. I have gone through the impugned award, the same is speaking one and needs no interference.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:58:15 :::HCHP...3...
7. Having said so, there is no merit in the appeal filed .
by the appellant/owner and the same is dismissed.
8. The Registry is directed to release the entire amount in favour of the claimant forthwith.
of
September 18, 2015 ( Mansoor Ahmad Mir )
(tilak) Chief Justice
rt
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:58:15 :::HCHP