IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA st ON THE 1 OF SEPTEMBER, 2023 MISC. PETITION No. 4515 of 2023 BETWEEN:-

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED THROUGH DIVISIONAL MANAGER DIVISIONAL OFFICE, DISTRICT RATLAM. (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (SHRI MONESH JINDAL, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER.)

AND

1. BIRBAL SURYANSHI S/O SIDDHU SURYANSHI, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, OCCUPATION: MESON AT PRESENT NOTHING VILLAGE UMARIYADAYA POST POLICE STATION AND TEHSIL MOHAN BADONDIYA DISTRICT SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. HUKUMCHAND S/O BAPULAL, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION: DRIVER KARJU, WARD NO 14 PS TEH. MOHAN BADONDIYA DIST. SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. MEHARBAN SINGH SISODIYA S/O BHAWARSINGH SISODIYA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST H NO. 26/04, WARD NO. 3 VILLAGE UMARIYADAYA P.S STATION AND TEH. MOHAN BADONDIYA, DIST. SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (SHRI AKHIL GODHA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1.)

This petition coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

The petitioner - Insurance Co. has filed the present petition under Article

227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by order dated 14.6.2023 whereby the application under Order 6 Rule 17 of C.P.C. seeking amendment in the claim case has been allowed.

Respondent No.1 has filed the claim case alleging that he met with an accident with vehicle bearing Registration No. MP-42-T-1129 driven by Hukumchand, owned by Meharban Singh and insured by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. During pendency of the claim case, an application was moved that due to typographical mistake the vehicle number has wrongly been mentioned in the case as MP-42-T-1129 whereas the correct number is MP-42-

T-1123. The owner and insurer of the vehicle are the same.

The application was opposed by the Insurance Co. that now the insured vehicle is being involved in this case in order to get the claim from the Insurance Co. In the FIR lodged by the claimant himself, the number of the vehicle MP- 42-T-1129 is written and now he cannot be permitted to change the same. Learned MACT has allowed the application as it was a typographical mistake. The rest of the documents reflect that the claimant met with an accident with vehicle bearing Registration No. MP-42-T-1123. Hence, the present petition before this Court.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

The claimant impleaded owner, driver and the Insurance Co. of the vehicle which dashed him, he disclosed the model of the vehicle, owner, driver and Insurance Co. and all matches with vehicle No. MP-42-T1123. The Insurance Co. has filed the reply and disclosed that MP-42-T-1123 is insured with them and not MP-42-T-1129. The claimant checked the documents and found that the vehicle number has wrongly been typed in the claim case. Except number of the vehicle, rest of the description of the vehicle that it was a 'Magic', name of owner, driver and Insurance Co. are the same. The Court below has rightly allowed the application for amendment. However, if the Insurance Co. is so aggrieved, it may file an application before the MACT for framing an additional issue for deciding the about said controversy. If the Court frames an additional issue, then opportunity be given to the claimant to give additional evidence, if sought.

With the aforesaid, this petition is disposed of.

(VIVEK RUSIA)

JUDGE Alok Digitally signed by ALOK GARGAV Date: 2023.09.02 16:06:48 +05'30'