Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED versus SMT. PARMESHWARI & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Smt. Parmeshwari & Others - MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. 656 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 14066 (16 August 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon. Dilip Gupta, J,

This application, under Article 227 of the Constitution, has been filed by the Oriental Insurance Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'Insurance Company') for quashing the judgment and award dated 3.5.2003 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') in MAC No. 832 of 1998 and the judgment and order dated 7.7.2007 by which the review application was rejected.

I have heard Sri A.B. Saran, learned Senior counsel for the applicant assisted by Sri Rahul Sahai and Sri Siddhartha, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

Sri A.B. Saran, learned Senior counsel for the applicant submitted that the Insurance Company wrongly pointed out that Truck No. USC-9301 was insured with it whereas the other Truck No. UHA-5206  was actually insured with the Insurance Company and when this mistake was detected after the award was made by the Tribunal, the review petition was filed but the Tribunal wrongly rejected the review petition. It is, in these circumstances,  that both the judgment and award dated 3.5.2003 and the order passed on the review petition on 7.7.2007 have been impugned in the present application.

A preliminary objection has been raised by Sri Siddhartha, learned counsel appearing for the respondents that the applicant has a statutory remedy of filing an Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,  1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and,  therefore, the present application should not be entertained. I find considerable force in the preliminary objection as both the orders impugned  can be challenged in Appeal. This application is, therefore, liable to be rejected and is, accordingly, rejected on the ground of statutory alternative remedy being available to the applicant.

Sri A.B. Saran, learned Senior counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the certified copy of the impugned orders may be returned to the applicant in order to avail the alternative remedy of filing  the Appeal under Section 173 of the Act.

Certified copies of the two impugned orders may, therefore, be returned to the learned counsel for the applicant after the photostat copies of the same are supplied.

Dt/-16.8.2007

Sharma/656


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.