NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. KUMARI ARTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. G. C. Jha, learned counsel for the appellant (Insurance Company), Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 (claimants) and Mr. Vikas Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No. 6 (owner of the vehicle) in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 298 of 2025.

(2.) Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel for the claimants, points out that the 4th respondent, Abhay Nath Jha, has since expired. Although there is no formal application to bring his legal representatives on record, Mr G.C. Jha, learned counsel for the Insurance Company, submits that such legal representatives are already on record and, therefore, this circumstance may be treated as substantial compliance. The contention is well-founded and, appropriately, not opposed by Mr Amit Kumar Das or Mr Vikas Kumar, the learned counsel for the respondents. Accordingly, we allow the request.

(3.) Miscellaneous Appeal No. 298 of 2025 is instituted by the appellant- Insurance Company and Cross Objection No. 15 of 2025 has been instituted by the claimants. Therefore, it is only appropriate that the Appeal and the Cross Objection are disposed of by this common judgment and order, as they ought to be so disposed of.