Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2606 (AP)

ABDUL MEHARUNNISA BEGUM, RJY, E.G.DSIT v. K APPA RAO, KKD, E.G.DIST & 4 OTHERS

CRP/1595/2015 · 2025-07-15

Harinath N

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010004372015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1595 OF Petition under Section 115 of C.P.C I.A.No.1344/2014 in M.V.O.P.No.72/1992, dated Additional District Judge, E.G. at Rajahmundry. Between: against the order passed in 18-02-2015 on the file of I Abdul Meharunnisa Begum, D/o.Khadr Jilani, Age 22 Years D.No.52-4-2, Rajendra Nagar, Rajahmundry,E.G.District ...PETITIONER/2''° PETITIONER-CLAIMANT N0.2 Occ.Student, AND 1. K Appa Rao, S/o.not Known age not known. Driver of Lorry No.AEN 1879, c/o.Mattaparthi Arjuna Rao, D.No.4-8-26, Kakinada, E.G.District. 2. Mattaparti Nookaratnam, W/o.Arjuna Rao, age not known. Owner of Lorry NO.AEN 1879, D.No.4-8-26, Kakinada. 3. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd, rep by its Divisional Manager, Rajahmundry, E.G.District. 4. Khadar Shariff, S/o.Abdul Ramachandrapuram, E.G.District. Khadar Jelani, age 52 years. 5. Najimunnisa Begum, W/o.Khadar Shariff, Age 46 Ramachandrapuram, E.G.District. (RR-1, 2, 4 & 5 are not necessary in this CRP) years, ...RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI CHANDRA SEKHAR ILAPAKURTI Counsel for the Respondents : NONE APPEARED The Court made the following ORDER : 1 APHC010004372015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1595/2015 Between: 1.ABDUL MEHARUNNISA BEGUM, RJY, E.G.DSIT, D/O.KHADR JILANI, AGE 22 YEARS, OCC.STUDENT, D.NO.52-4-2, RAJENDRA NAGAR, RAJAHMUNDRY, E.G.DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1.K APPA RAO KKD E G DIST 4 OTHERS, S/O.NOT KNOWN, AGE NOT KNOWN, DRIVER OF LORRY NO.AEN 1879, C/O.MATTAPARTHl ARJUNA RAO, D.NO.4-8-26, KAKINADA, E.G.DISTRICT. 2.MATTAPARTI NOOKARATNAM KNOWN, KAKINADA. W/0.ARJUNA RAO, AGE NOT OWNER OF LORRY NO.AEN 1879, D.NO.4-8-26, 3.0RIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, REP BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, RAJAHMUNDRY, E.G.DISTRICT. 4.KHADAR SHARIFF, S/O.ABDUL KHADAR JELANI, AGE 52 YEARS, RAMACHANDRAPURAM, E.G.DISTRICT. 5.NAJIMUNNISA BEGUM, W/O.KHADAR SHARIFF, AGE 46 YEARS, RAMACHANDRAPURAM, E.G.DISTRICT. . (RR-1, 2, 4 & 5 ARE NOT NECESSARY IN THIS CRP) ...RESPONDENT(S): •I 2 Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased toagainst the order passed in I.A.No.1344/2014 in M.V.O.P.No.72/1992, dated 18-02-2015 on the file of I Additional District Judge, E.G. at Rajahmundry, Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.CHANDRA SEKHAR ILAPAKURTI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. 3 The Court made the following Order: Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was a minor when M.V.O.P.No.72 of 1992 was filed on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (I Additional District Judge), Rajahmundry, East Godavari District. The M.V.O.P. was allowed, awarding compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- to the petitioners and the 5**^ respondent, together with interest. Out of the amount of compensation awarded, an amount of Rs.50,000/- was to be credited to the 1®* petitioner therein and an amount of Rs.40,000/- was to be credited to the 2"'^ petitioner therein and an amount of Rs. 10,000/- was to be credited to the 5**^ respondent therein. The petitioner was arrayed as 2 petitioner in M.V.O.P.No.72 of 1992. nd 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that thereafter, the insurance company filed C.M.A.No.2643 of 2004, which was allowed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 20.03.2009 by observing that, as the vehicle was not covered in insurance policy, a third party claim for death/injury of such gratuitous passenger is not maintainable. Further, the learned Judge had also held that compensation if any paid to the claimants after passing of impugned award or during pendency of the appeal shall not be recovered from them, and the learned Judge left it open to the appellant to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner submitted I.A.No.1344 of 2014 in M.V.O.P.No.72 of 1992, seeking permission of the Court to withdraw the amount of compensation deposited in the name of 4 the petitioner before the trial Court. The learned I Additional District Judge, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, dismissed the petition on the consideration that C.M.A.No.2643 of 2004 was allowed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. There is no representation for the respondents and the Civil Revision Petition is pending for the last ten years. Perused the order passed by the I Additional District Judge, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District. The learned I Additional District Judge has ignored the directions at the operative portion of the order passed by this Court in C.M.A.No.2643 of 2004 and has passed an erroneous order. This Court had clarified that any compensation paid to the claimants shall not be recovered from them, and it was left open for the insurance company to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. 4. 5. On these considerations, this Court is of the considered view that the order passed by the learned I Additional District Judge, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, deserves to be set aside. 6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. The order passed by the learned I Additional District Judge, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, in I.A.No.1344 of 2014 in M.V.O.P.No.72 of 1992 is hereby set aside. The concerned Court shall release the payment lying in the name of the petitioner in the account of M.V.O.P.No.72 of 1992 on the petitioner submitting the identity proof. It is made clear that, at any rate, the amount shall 7. 5 be released to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the submission of the identity proof of the petitioner. No costs. 8. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- N.NAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR T //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The I Additional District Judge, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District 2. One CC to Sri. Chandra Sekhar llapakurti Advocate [OPUC] 3. The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi 4. Two CD Copies Stu ^ St HIGH COURT DATED:16/07/2025 ORDER CRP NO. 1595 OF 2015 .* ?5JUL-2()25 ^ . Current Seciien ALLOWING THE CIVIL REVISION PETITION