ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE Vs. RATIBEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The insurance Company is challenging the judgment and award dtd. 28/3/2019 passed in MACP no.98/14 by the MACT (Aux), Kalol, District Gandhinagar and has raised various grounds but the primary ground which has been brought to the notice of this Court is the order below Exh.51, where the present appellant had made a prayer to join the owner, driver and insurance Company of Innova Car bearing registration no. GJ-24 A- 8486, which came to be rejected by the Tribunal on the very same day dtd. 11/10/2018.

(2.) Advocate Mr. Sunil Parikh stated that the mother and daughter were crossing the road and the mother in MACP no.70/14 had settled with the insurance Company of the Innova Car i.e. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. and by way of compromise dtd. 21/2/2015, the award was ordered to be drawn. It is submitted that the very claim petition itself shows the involvement of the Innova Car and has stated that the fact of negligence aspect is required to be considered and that the learned Tribunal has erred in rejecting the application Exh.51, where a specific prayer was made by the appellant to join the owner, driver and insurance Company of Innova Car. Mr. Parikh has relied upon the telephonic vardhi, which reflects the involvement of Innova Car.

(3.) While Advocate Mr. Hiren Modi submitted that actually the case of the claimants was that while crossing the road, the mother was hit by Innova Car bearing registration no. GJ-24 A-8486 and therefore, she had filed MACP No.70/14, while the daughter was dashed with Accent car and the fact has been proved before the Tribunal and accordingly, the compensation amount has been granted. Mr. Modi stated that the order below Exh.51 is rightly rejected.