I C I C I LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. AJAY KUMAR
AO/142/2023 · 2025-08-29
Registrar Judicial
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5577 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5577 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s
order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
AO No.142 of 2023 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Bharat Tewari and Mr. Pulak Agarwal,
learned counsel for the appellant.
2. Mr. Susheel Kumar, learned counsel for respondent no.1.
3. Mr. Rohit Kumar Gaur, learned counsel for respondent no.2.
4. Mr. Priyanshu Gairola,
learned counsel for respondent no.4.
5. Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, learned counsel for respondent no.5.
6. This Appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 (r) C.P.C. has been filed against the
order dated 28.11.2022 passed by learned MACT/2nd Addl. District Judge, Nainital in MACP No.144 of 2010, Ajay Kumar vs. Thakur Chandan Singh, by which an award of Rs.2,50,315/- with interest @6% per annum as compensation has been awarded by the Tribunal.
7.
Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the learned Tribunal has erred in not considering the factum of accident, as no FIR was lodged by the claimants and no material to prove the factum of the accident; that, the Tribunal did not take into consideration that the vehicle was carrying hazardous material, but was not possessing the necessary
documents, the same was ignored by the learned Court Below; that, vehicle was being driven by the driver without proper documents, as such the appellant had no liability.
8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the impugned order, this Court is of the view that there is no infirmity in the order impugned in the present appeal.
9. In the considered view of this Court, the order passed by the learned court below is correct and justified in the facts and circumstances of the case and therefore does not call for any interference by this Court.
10. Accordingly, the appeal lacks merit and is dismissed in limine.
(Alok Mahra, J.)
29.08.2025 BS
BALWANT SINGH Digitally signed by BALWANT SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=fbbd191c8bdb8b16e8ca7937deaf72a17c02fe2eacbf28cdf4ba 7ce8640c5820, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=04E141DF4614F9A4D5F48346EB553DE5185F418755DC 00A7A13C14A680C3FA90, cn=BALWANT SINGH Date: 2025.08.29 17:20:55 +05'30'