IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. OF 2025 (@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NOS. 6650-6651 of 2020)

KANTA DEVI APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS ANUJ CHAUHAN & ANR. RESPONDENT(S)

R1: ANUJ CHAUHAN R2: ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

O R D E R

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Leave granted.

3. The present appeals have been filed against the common impugned judgment and order dated 29.11.2019 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla, in FAO Nos. 620 of 2016 and 27 of 2017, whereby the appeal filed by the Insurance Company (FAO No. 27 of 2017) was partly allowed and the appeal filed by the owner of the offending vehicle (FAO No. 620 of 2016) was dismissed. 4. The grievance of the appellant-claimant is that though, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as the, ‘Tribunal’) had awarded Signature Not Verified Digitaly signed by VARSHA MENDIRATTA

Date: 2c025o.11m.08pensation of Rs.27,48,000/- (Rupees Twenty Seven Lakhs Forty

Reason:

Eight Thousand) along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date

of filing of the petition, till realization, the High Court, by the

impugned order, fastened the entire liability upon the registered owner and exonerated the respondent no.2-Insurance Company. It was submitted that the appellant-claimant is not in a position to effectively recover the amount from the owner, who is stated to be poor, and such a direction causes grave prejudice.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Court may direct the respondent no.2-Insurance Company to pay the compensation upfront, with liberty to recover the said amount from respondent no.1, the owner of the offending vehicle, in accordance with law.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.2-Insurance Company, upon instructions, submits that they would not oppose such a direction, if liberty to recover the amount from the owner is expressly reserved.

7. Though, notice has been duly served on the respondent no.1- owner, none has entered appearance or appeared on his behalf, when the case is taken up.

8. Having considered the matter and in the interest of justice, we direct that the respondent no.2-Insurance Company shall pay the amount of compensation as awarded by the Tribunal in terms of its order dated 14.09.2016, within a period of eight weeks from today. However, the respondent no.2-Insurance Company shall be entitled to recover the said amount from respondent no.1-the owner of the offending vehicle, by initiating appropriate proceedings before the Tribunal concerned, in accordance with law.

9. The appeals stand allowed to the extent indicated above.

10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

......................J.

(AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH)

......................J.

(SANDEEP MEHTA)

NEW DELHI

04TH NOVEMBER, 2025.

ITEM NO.25 COURT NO.13 SECTION III-B S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 6650-6651/2020 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29-11-2019 in FAO No. 620/2016 29-11-2019 in FAO No. 27/2017 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla]

KANTA DEVI PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS ANUJ CHAUHAN & ANR. RESPONDENT(S)

Date : 04-11-2025 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sudarsh Menon, AOR Mr. Udbhav Sinha, Adv.

Mrs. Nimisha Menon, Adv.

Ms. Usha Rani Pradhan, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Navneet Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Harsh Sharan, Adv.

Mr. Parijat Kishore, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

Leave granted.

2. The appeals stand allowed in terms of the signed order.

3. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

(VARSHA MENDIRATTA) (ANJALI PANWAR)

COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (Signed order is placed on the file)