The New India Assurance Company Limited, Through Executive v. Master Mahipal Chaudhary
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 s. 173(2)
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. All pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. AVINASH GULERIA /3 (SANDEEP TANEJA),J
Judgment
1. Master Mahipal Chaudhary, Aged About 17 Years, Minor Through Father And Guardian Sukhpal, Resident- Nearby Charbhuja Mandir, Gram Post- Bhanvta, Tehsil And District- Ajmer (Rajasthan).
Raseed Son Of Shri Subhan Ali, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of Nearby Idgah, Village Daurai, Police Station Ramganj, District Ajmer (Rajasthan). (Driver Maruti Van No. Rj-01-Ua-6860)
3. Ashok Kumar Son Of Shri Bhanwarlal, Aged About 58 Years, Resident Of House No.- 850/7, Ambedkar Nagar, Nearby Sant Kanwar School, Pahadganj, Police Station Ramganj, District- Ajmer (Rajasthan). (Registered Owner Maruti Van) ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singhal For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Order 17/04/2026
The present appeal has been filed against the award dated
16.01.2026 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ajmer in Claim Case No.125/2023, whereby the claim petition filed by the claimant-respondent No.1 was partly allowed and a compensation [2026:RJ-JP:16088] (2 of 2) [CMA-1743/2026] of Rs.43,000/- was awarded in favour of claimant-respondent No.1-Master Mahipal Chaudhary.
Section 173(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides that no appeal shall lie against any award of a Claim Tribunal, if the amount in disputed in the appeal, is less than rupees one lakh.
In view of the said provision, the present appeal, which has been filed against the impugned award, whereby the compensation of Rs.43,000/- has been awarded, being not maintainable, is dismissed.
It is made clear that this order shall not affect other appeal(s), if any, filed by the appellant against the aforesaid impugned award.
All pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. AVINASH GULERIA /3 (SANDEEP TANEJA),J
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.