[2025:RJ-JP:50198] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 11/2025 In S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 4834/2017 1. Devkaran S/o Shri Nauratmal, Aged About 55 Years, (Father) 2. Lachhadevi W/o Shri Devkaran, Aged About 50 Years, (Mother) 3. Lada D/o Shri Devkaran, Aged About 27 Years, (Younger Sister) 4. Gyarsi D/o Shri Devkaran, Aged About 25 Years, (Younger Sister) 5. Pappu S/o Shri Devkaran, Aged About 23 Years, (Younger Brother) All are R/o Village Kali Pal Sursura, Police Station Rupangarh District Ajmer (Rajasthan) ----Appellant Claimants/Non-Applicants Versus 1. Vishram S/o Shri Kishna Shri Kishna, Age 48 Years, R/o Village Rampura, Police Station Bandar Sindri, District Ajmer, (Driver Motorcycle No. RJ01SV4008) 2. Sukhdev S/o Shri Bhairulal, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Village Chitakheda, Police Station Gandhinagar, District Ajmer, Raj. (Registered Vehicle Owner Motorcycle No. RJ01SV4008) ----Respondent Non-claimant/Non-applicants 3. National Insurance Company Limited, Through Branch Manager, Branch Office 205, 208 Green House, Ashok Marg, C Scheme, Jaipur, District Jaipur Raj. (Insurer Vehicle Motorcycle No. RJ 01 SV 4008 Insurance Effective From 05.11.2012 To 04.11.2013) ----Respondent Non-claimant/Applicant [2025:RJ-JP:50198] (2 of 4) [CMAP-11/2025] For Applicant(s) : Mr. Rajeev Bhushan Bansal, Adv. with Ms. Ritu Bansal, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bhanu Prakash Verma, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 10/12/2025 1. The present application has been filed on behalf of the applicant-Insurance Company for recalling of the order dated 21.12.2024 passed by the National Lok Adalat, whereby, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties, the appeal filed by claimants-appellants was disposed, and the applicant-Insurance Company was directed to pay an additional amount of Rs.1,36,000/- including interest in favour of the claimants-appellants. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant-Insurance Company submits that on account of death of Mahaveer, the claimants- appellants filed a claim petition No.37/2014 before learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kishangarh, District Ajmer (hereinafter referred to as the learned ‘Tribunal’), whereby, vide judgment and award dated 12.05.2017, the claim petition was partly allowed and an award of Rs.7,59,300/- along with the interest @ 6% per annum was passed in favour of the claimants-appellants. Learned counsel further submits that in the aforesaid claim petition, the offending vehicle involved in the alleged incident was insured by 'Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd.', therefore, the same Insurance Company was impleaded as respondent No.3 in the [2025:RJ-JP:50198] (3 of 4) [CMAP-11/2025] claim petition before learned Tribunal and reply to the said claim petition was also filed by the same Insurance Company. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant-Insurance Company contends that vide order dated 12.05.2017, the said claim petition was partly allowed, wherein, in the cause-title name of 'National Insurance Company Ltd.' has wrongly been mentioned as respondent No.3, in place of 'Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd.'. Learned counsel further contends that as name of the 'National Insurance Company Ltd.' has wrongly been mentioned as respondent No.3, therefore, in the present appeal, 'National Insurance Company Ltd.' was added as respondent No.3 in the array of respondents and vide order dated 19.01.2021 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, notices were issued to 'National Insurance Company Ltd.' and Mr. Rajeev Bhushan Bansal, Adv. appeared on behalf of the respondent No.3-'National Insurance Company Ltd.'. 4. Vide order dated 21.12.2024 passed by the National Lok Adalat, the appeal was disposed of on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties and thereafter, it was noticed by the 'National Insurance Company Ltd.' that it has been wrongly impleaded as party respondent in the present case. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant-Insurance Company prays that the present application be allowed and the order dated 21.12.2024 passed by the National Lok Adalat in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.4834/2017 be recalled and it may be ordered that S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.4834/2017 be restored to its original number. [2025:RJ-JP:50198] (4 of 4) [CMAP-11/2025] 6. Learned counsel for the claimants-appellants admits the fact that in the present case, the offending vehicle is insured by 'Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd.' and name of 'National Insurance Company Ltd.' has wrongly been mentioned as respondent No.3 in the impugned judgment and award dated 12.05.2017 passed by learned Tribunal. Learned counsel prays that some time may be granted to move appropriate application before the Court and learned Tribunal, with regard to, impleadment of 'Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd.' as party-respondent in the array of respondents. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. For the reasons mentioned therein, the present application is allowed and the order dated 21.12.2024 passed in National Lok Adalat is hereby recalled. S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.4834/2017 is ordered to be restored to its original number. 9. Office to proceed. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J AARZOO ARORA /91