S. No. 7 Regular Cause List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CONC No. 67/2018 Mohammad Ayoub Mir …Appellant/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Rizwan-ul-Zaman, Advocate Vs. National Insurance Company and Ors. ...Respondent(s) Through: None CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, JUDGE O R D E R 12.02.2025 1. Instant application filed by applicant is for extension of time in filing the appeal against the award dated 17.10.2015 and Orders dated 09.12.2015 and 06.07.2018, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kulgam (for short “Tribunal”) to the extent it has given liberty to the Insurance Company to file recovery suit against the owner, if Insurance Company chooses so. 2. It is stated by learned counsel for applicant/appellant that the Tribunal had decided the issue regarding driving license of driver of the offending vehicle in favor of applicant and against respondents. The Tribunal while deciding the issue regarding the driving license has held that the driver was holding valid driving license. Finding to this effect has been given while deciding the issue No.3 whereas it was to be done while deciding issue No.4. 3. Finding returned by Tribunal regarding validity of the driving license is that Insurance Company could not prove that driver was not having effective driving licence, and that the Insurance Company shall pay compensation, but at the same time the Tribunal has given liberty to Insurance Company to recover the amount from owner of offending vehicle. When award was put to execution by Insurance Company in order to recover the award amount from owner and pay the same to claimants, the applicant herein took an objection regarding the liability on the ground that once the finding has been returned that the driving license is valid, the Insurance Company cannot be given liberty to recover the compensation. Applicant contested the execution petition on the ground that driver of the offending vehicle was holding valid driving license, but the Tribunal did not favour the applicant and rejected his claim. Applicant after rejection of his application has filed an appeal challenging the award to the extent of giving right of recovery to the Insurance Company. 4. In this application, the applicant/petitioner is seeking extension of time to condone the delay occasioned in contesting the execution petition before the Tribunal/Executing Court as he was not liable to pay award amount. The Insurance Company has no right to recover the award amount from the owner once the driver was holding valid driving license. 5. The grounds taken by applicant for condoning the delay occasioned in filing the appeal is sufficient. Applicant consciously with due diligence contested the petition while execution was put in motion, therefore, period which he has spent in contesting the execution petition is required to be excluded. 6. Accordingly, this application is allowed and delay occasioned in filing the appeal is condoned subject to payment of costs of Rs.5000/-, to be deposited in Litigants Welfare Fund within one month. CM disposed of. 7. Subject to petitioner depositing the costs in Litigants Welfare Fund within the prescribed time period, Registry to diarize the appeal and list the same for consideration on 07.04.2025. (VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL) JUDGE SRINAGAR 12.02.2025 Manzoor Manzoor Ul Hassan Dar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Srinagar 06.03.2025 16:34