SUNIL SETHI Vs. GOPALTL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall also govern the disposal of MA No. 235/2000. Being aggrieved by inadequacy of the amount awarded vide award dated 20.11.1999 passed by 14th MACT, Indore in Claim Case No. 68/1999, whereby the claim petition filed by respondent No. 1 has been allowed in which award of Rs. 26,000 along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of application has been passed against the appellant, the present appeal has been filed.

(2.) SHORT facts of the case are that on 23.4.1984 the accident took place on MG Road, Indore in which respondent No. 1 was travelling on scooter bearing registration No. CPF 5485 which was owned by respondent No. 2, driven by respondent No. 3. It was alleged by respondent No. 3 that the scooter was insured with respondent No. 4. In the accident respondent No. 1 sustained injuries. Claim petition was filed on 28.1.1985 wherein it was alleged that accident of scooter bearing Registration No. CPF 5485 took place with car bearing Registration No. MPN 2249, which was owned by Smt. Subdhra Sethi and was driven by the appellant.

(3.) AFTER filing of the reply on 15.1.1990, the application was filed by Smt. Subdhra Sethi for deleting her name as respondent. The application was allowed on that very date and the name of Smt. Subdhra Sethi was also deleted. Thereafter, the application was filed by the respondent No. 1 under Section 152 of C.P.C. for reviewing the order dated 15.1.1990, which was dismissed vide order dated 9 22.4.1991. Thereafter, again an application was filed wherein the same type of prayer was made for joining Smt. Subdhra Sethi as party. This application was also dismissed on 1.10.1994 against which the matter came up before this Court and the same was dismissed on 17.9.1998. Thus, the net result was that the name of Smt. Subdhra Sethi was deleted from the era of non-applicants, who was initially party to the proceedings and she was not allowed to join inspite of repeated requests made by respondent No. 1. Thereafter, the respondent No. 4 who is appearing for United India Insurance Company submitted the written statement wherein it was specifically denied that scooter bearing Registration No. CPF 5485 was insured with respondent No. 4. Hence liability of respondent No. 4 was also denied. Respondent No. 5 also denied its liability.