The Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai v. Pinky Singh and Ors.
MA/723/2013 · 2026-02-06
Rajiv Roy
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 38795 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 38795 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Appeal No.723 of 2013 ====================================================== The Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai The Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, 3rd Floor, Kaushalaya Estate, Bander Bagicha, Patna ... ... Appellant/s Versus
1. Pinky Singh W/O Lt. Laxman Kumar Singh Resident Of Village Banama, P.O. Pachrukhi, P.S. Sahkund, District Bhagalpur.
2. Lovely Kumari D/O Lt. Laxman Kumar Singh (Minor And Is Under The Natural Guardian Mother, Res. 1) Resident Of Village Banama, P.O. Pachrukhi, P.S. Sahkund, District Bhagalpur.
3. Devanand S/O Lt. Laxman Kumar Singh (Minor And Is Under The Natural Guardian Mother, Res. 1) Resident Of Village Banama, P.O. Pachrukhi, P.S. Sahkund, District Bhagalpur.
4. Jogmaya Devi W/O Lt. Nagashwar Prasad Singh Resident Of Village Banama, P.O. Pachrukhi, P.S. Sahkund, District Bhagalpur.
5. Chandan Kumar Yadav S/O Lt. Shiv Yadav Resident Of Village Bishanpur Jichho, P.O. Jichho, P.S. Lodipur, District Bhagalpur Owner Cum Driver Of Vehicle. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Durgesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 7 06-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s:
“against the order dated 01.08.2013 passed by
learned
District
Judge, Bhagalpur(hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in Claim Case No. 48 of 2012 ‘Pinky Sing & Ors vs. Chandan Kumar
Patna High Court MA No.723 of 2013(7) dt.06-02-2026 2/2 Yadav & Ors’ by which compensation u/s 140 of the M.V. Act has been allowed against the appellant”.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant prays for withdrawal of the petition.
4. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
5. The statutory amount, if any, has to be returned.
Ravi/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U