IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Ajay Mohan Goel, J
Cholamandlam Insurance Company Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Sh. Joginder Singh – Respondent
CMPMO No.95 of 2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the petition challenges the rejection of a delay application for a claim based on accident details. (Para 2) |
…Petitioners Versus Sh. Joginder Singh and another …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge
1 Whether approved for reporting?
For the petitioner: Mr. Virender Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Rajender Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.1.
Mr. Jeevesh Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral By way of this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following H reliefs:-
“It is, therefore, prayed that this petition may kindly be allowed and the impugned order dated 06.01.2025 passed by learned MACT-III, Shimla, District Shimla, HP on application under Section 1666(3) of the MV Act R/W Order 7 R 11 R/W Section 151 CPC on behalf of the petitioner Company registered as CMP No.314 of 2024 in MAC No.80 of 2023, titled Joginder Singh Vs. Baldev Singh and another may kindly be quashed and set aside in the interest of justice and fair play.”
2. The petitioner has assailed the order passed by the learned Tribunal dated 06.01.2025, in terms whereof., learned Tribunal has rejected the application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC by the petitioner to the effecHt that the claim petition was filed beyond the period of limitation. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the impugned order was not sustainable in the eyes of law for the reason that learned Court erred in not appreciating that as the claim was not filed within the statutory period of six mounths, the same was liable to be dismissed. Learned couonsel further argued that the learned Tribunal erred in not apCpreciating that it did not have any jurisdiction to entertain a claim petition filed beyond the period of limitation, more so when it was not accompanied by any application praying for condonation of delay. He submitted that in light of the statutory H provisions as were existing at the time when the accident took place, the claimants were bound to have approached the Court within the period of limitation and their act of not approaching the Court within the period of limitation is bad.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the order passed by the learned Tribunal is a self-speaking order and the same does not call for any interference because it is a matter of record that .after the incident took place on 29.08.2022, an FIR was registered i.e. 72 of 2022 under Sections 279, 337, 338 of thHe IPC and Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act at Police Station Kotkhai and the accident information report was duly sent by the Police Station to MACT Shimla.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also carefully gonue through the order under challenge as well as the documenots appended with the petition.
5. CIn terms of the impugned order, learned Tribunal has disposed of an application filed by respondent No.2 therein for the dismissal of the claim petition under the provisions of Order 7 rule 11 of the CPC. The prayer in the application filed under H Order 7 Rule 11 was that the accident in question had occurred on 12.06.2022, but the claim petition was filed on 11.09.2023 and there was a delay of more than one year and three months and further as Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 2019 , provides that no application for compensation shall be entertained unless it is made within six months of the occurrence of the accident the claim was time barred. The response to the said application from the claim was that the accident information report was f.orwarded by the Police of Police Station Kotkhai to MACT Shimla on 19.09.2022 and the claim petition fileHd by the claimant in continuation thereof. The claimant received notice from MACT(II), Shimla on 28.08.2023 and after appearance the claimant were allowed to file a separate claim petition. It was denied in the response that the petition was time
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.