Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 11352 (HP)

SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD v. Tara Minhans and Others

CMP/8395/2025 · 2025-06-04

Vivek Singh Thakur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Shriram General Insurance Vs. Tara Minhas FAO (MVA) No. 21 of 2021 4.6.2025 Present: Mr.Virender Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.Devender K. Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No. 1 and 2. None for respondent No. 4, though represented by Mr.Rakesh Chauhan, Advocate. Mr.Manjeet Singh, Advocate, vice Mr.G.R. Palsra, Advocate, for respondents No. 5(a) to 5(c). Ms.Shivani Tegta, Advocate, vice Mr.Anil Tomar, Advocate, for respondent No. 6. CMP No. 8395 of 2025 This application has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 1 Tara Minhas for release of amount of compensation in her favour on the ground that she is in dire need of amount for solemnizing marriage of her son Ankush, who is respondent No. 2 in the appeal. Copy of marriage invitation card has been placed on record to indicate that marriage is going to be solemnized on 8th and 9th June, 2025. It is apt to record that 50% amount of share of applicant-respondent No. 1 as well as non-applicant/ respondent No. 2, falling in their respective shares was released vide order dated 17.11.2021. Release of amount has been opposed by appellant/Insurance Company on the ground that deceased himself was rash and negligent and even FIR was also registered against him in this regard. Perusal of record indicates that claimants in present case are claiming compensation on account of death of Kailash Chand, who was husband of applicant/respondent No. 1 and father of respondent No. 2, whereas FIR was lodged in present matter by one Baldev Raj against Narinder Kumar, S/o Mahender Pratap owner-cum-driver of Autorikshaw involved in the accident. Therefore, plea taken to oppose the application is misconceived and thus rejected. It has been submitted on behalf of applicant that deceased Kailash Chand was passenger in the Three Wheeler and, therefore, on account of his death claimants in present case are entitled for compensation either from the Insurance Company or driver of Truck or driver of Three Wheeler, but in any case applicants being claimants should not suffer for dispute between other persons disputing the liability of each other. In aforesaid facts and circumstances, further 25% amount of compensation alongwith up to date proportionate interest falling in share of applicant/respondent No. 1 is ordered to be released in her favour by remitting the same in her bank account mentioned in para 5 of the application. Photocopy of front page of bank pass book is also placed on record. It is made clear that in case amount released is found in excess, applicants shall refund the excess amount alongwith interest. The release of amount shall be subject to final outcome of the appeal. The application stands disposed of. (Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge. 4th June, 2025 (Keshav)