Anisha Vs. MD HRTC CMP (M) No. 1940 of 2024 18.6.2025 Present: Mr.Neel Kamal Sharma, Advocate, for the applicant/appellant. Mr.Vinod Gupta, Advocate, for respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr.Ashwani Kaundal, Advocate, for respondent No. 3. CMP (M) No. 1940 of 2024 This application has been filed for condonation of 19 days delay in filing the appeal. For the reasons stated in the application and submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, delay of 19 days in filing the appeal is condoned. The appeal be registered. The application stands disposed of. FAO (MVA) No. …. of 2025 (FAOST No. 45070 of 2024) Be registered. In the memo of parties, respondent No. 4 has been reflected as Insurance Company to be disclosed by respondents No. 1 to 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that memo of parties has been typed in consonance with the parties mentioned in the memo of parties of the impugned award. The vehicle involved in the accident was owned and possessed by Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation. It is well known that Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation is exempted from purchase of Insurance Cover for its vehicles and it is also a fact that no Insurance Company was ever disclosed by respondents No. 1 to 3 either before the MACT or in this Court, rather, it has been informed by learned counsel for Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation that for vehicles of HRTC no Insurance Cover is purchased. Respondent No. 4 is a non-existant Company and should not have been arrayed as party as there should be a note by learned counsel for the appellant by applying his mind that there is no such Insurance Company in existence, as such there is no necessity to reflect respondent No. 4 as Insurance Company to be disclosed by respondents No. 1 to 3. Amended memo of parties be filed by reflecting respondents No. 1 to 3 only. Needful be done within one week. Admit. Records be requisitioned. List for final hearing in due course after completion. (Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge. 18th June, 2025 (Keshav)