Allahabad High Court High Court

Lavlesh Pandit vs State Of U.P. And Others on 25 January, 2010

Allahabad High Court
Lavlesh Pandit vs State Of U.P. And Others on 25 January, 2010
Court No. - 27

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 59639 of 2008

Petitioner :- Lavlesh Pandit
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Arvind Singh Sengar
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,J.K. Ojha,Smt Usha Srivastava


Hon'ble Sibghat Ullah Khan,J.

Heard Sri Arvind Singh Sengar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri J.K.

Ojha, learned counsel for the claimant respondent No.2, Smt. Kalmatiya.

This writ petition is directed against order dated 21.10.2008 passed passed by

M.A.C.T./ A.D.J. Court No.2, Chitrakoot in Misc. Case No.15/74/08, Lavlesh

Pandit Vs. Smt. Kalmatiya. Through the said order, petitioner’s application for

restoration was rejected. Restoration application had been filed for setting

aside the ex parte award dated 19.11.2007 passed by District Judge/ M.A.C.T.

in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.5/70 of 2006. (The claim petition was

allowed and Rs.50,000/- was awarded as compensation). In the claim petition,

Ram Naresh alleged owner of the vehicle was opposite party No.1 and

petitioner alleged driver of the vehicle was opposite party No.2. The petitioner

contended that he was not served with the summons/ notice. Restoration

application was filed after prescribed period along with delay condonation. In

the impugned order, it has been observed that thrice steps to serve were taken

and on the third occasion summons returned with the endorsement of refusal.

However, it is also mentioned that process server, Utsav Kumar filed affidavit

stating that petitioner had received the copy of the notice. Due to above

contradiction, I am of the opinion that restoration application deserved to be

allowed.

Writ petition is allowed. Impugned order rejecting the restoration application

of petitioner driver is set aside and claim petition is restored on payment of
Rs.10,000/- as part of claim. Both the parties are directed to appear before the

Claims Tribunal on 25.02.2010. On the said date, petitioner shall deposit the

amount of Rs.10,000/- before the tribunal for immediate payment to the

claimant respondent No.2. The amount shall be paid to the claimant through

deposit in her bank account. Respondent No.2 is directed to implead insurance

company, i.e. IFFCO-TOKIO. Notice must be issued to the said insurance

company and the other parties and matter must be decided very expeditiously.

If ultimately claimant is found entitled to the grant of some compensation and

compensation is found payable by the insurance company, then this amount of

Rs.10,000/- deposited by the petitioner shall be directed to be paid to the

petitioner by the insurance company.

Order Date :- 25.1.2010
NLY