I nsurance Co. Lt d v. Swaran Nat ional Singh ot hers, r eport ed in

Mr. D.C.S. Rawat , Advocat e for t he appellant . Mr. Shankar Aggarwal and Mr. Ashish t he claim ant / Aggar wal, Advocat es respondent no.1.

2. This Appeal from Order has been filed by t he I nsurance Com pany challenging t he awar d dat ed 21.09.2023 passed by learned Mot or Accident Claim s Tribunal/ Addit ional Dist rict Judge, Khat im a, Dist rict Udham Singh Nagar passed in M.A.C.P. No.297 of 2019. Lear ned counsel

3. t he appellant subm it s t hat t he alleged accident occur red on 15.10.2015, w her eas t he claim pet it ion inst it ut ed only aft er a consider able delay of four y ear s, nam ely on 01.11.2019; t hat no First I nform at ion Report in respect of t he said accident was lodged, nor was t he insured vehicle seized by invest igat ion; and t hat t he m ont hly incom e of the claimant, assessed at ₹12,000/- by t he lear ned Tribunal, has been det erm ined on an exaggerat ed basis. I t is subm it t ed t hat such an overest im at ion of incom e t he direct ly com pensat ion, t hereby causing an undue bur den on insurer. Lear ned counsel cont ends t hat , in light of t hese fact ors, t he Tribunal’s awar d war rant s r e- exam inat ion and int erference by t his Court . com put at ion t he Police careful affect s t he Per cont ra, learned counsel appearing 4. on behalf of respondent no. 1 subm it s t hat no period of lim it at ion is prescribed under t he Mot or Vehicles Act , 1988 and t hat t he t he Claim Pet it ion was filing rem ained his m edical t he Claim Pet it ion w as occasioned by t he sev ere inj uries sust ained by t he respondent no. 1, who was fully t reat m ent ; engaged accordingly , aft er a lapse of four years. Wit h r egar d t o t he non- filing of an F.I .R., it is subm it t ed t hat respondent no. 1 was adm it t ed t o Susheela Tiwari Governm ent Hospit al, Haldwani, w her e a Medico- Legal Case report was for war ded t o t he Police by t he Hospit al fat her aut horit ies, and his at t endance for him during his t o care hospit alizat ion. Thereaft er, w hen r espondent no. 1 approached t he Police St at ion t o lodge a form al com plaint , t he Police declined t o regist er t hat a t he F.I .R., cont ending considerable period had elapsed since t he occur rence of t he accident . Lear ned counsel furt her t hat respondent no. 1 was duly est ablished t hrough t est im ony of Vikram Singh Negi, w ho deposed t hat r espondent no. 1 was em ployed as a Supervisor on his far m rem uner at ion of and earned a m ont hly t he ₹12,000/ - . t hat I t com pensat ion awarded by learned in st rict Tribunal conform it y wit h law, and, t her efor e, does not call for any int erfer ence by t his Court in exer cise of it s appellat e j urisdict ion. t he j ust , equit able, and cont ended subm it s incom e t he t he Upon consider at ion t he 5. subm issions advanced by lear ned counsel for t he part ies and a m et iculous perusal of t he record, t his Court is sat isfied t hat t he learned Tribunal has right ly ex ercised it s discr et ion in awarding com pensat ion. The delay in pr esent ing t he Claim Pet it ion is t he grievous adequat ely explained by inj uries sust ained by respondent no. 1 and his pr eoccupat ion wit h m edical t r eat m ent and also t he circum st ances w hich ar e recognized under Sect ion 166 of t he Mot or Vehicles Act , 1988. Moreover, t he evidence adduced respondent no. 1, part icularly t he t est im ony rem ains r egarding incom e Vikram Singh Negi, t he t he uncont rovert ed. The assessm ent of claimant’s monthly income at ₹12,000/- and t he consequent award of com pensat ion by t he Tribunal are r easonable, equit able, and in st rict conform it y wit h law . Hon’ble Supr em e Court in t he case of 6. I nsurance Co. Lt d. Vs. Swaran Nat ional Singh & ot hers, r eport ed in ( 2004) 3 SCC 297, has held t hat subst ant ial j ust ice ought not t o be t hwart ed on m ere t echnicalit ies such as delay, pr ovided a bona fide cause exist s. I n t hese cir cum st ances,

7. t he aw ard passed by t he learned Tribunal cannot be t he t o be unj ust or arbit rary . On cont rary , it appears t o be fair, r easonable, and in consonance wit h law, warrant ing no int erference by t his Court .

8. Accordingly, fails and is dism issed. t he Appeal from Order

9. The st at ut ory am ount , if deposit ed by t he appellant at t he t im e of filing t he appeal, shall be r em it t ed t o t he Tribunal concerned for adj ust m ent t owards t he award am ount . The balance am ount , if any, shall be released in favour of t he claim ant as per t he direct ions of t he Tribunal. ( A l o k M a h r a , J.)

14.10.2025 Arpan ARPAN JAISWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c0485 365445e3a20dddb7393398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D 454C5109CB987446351E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA6 6, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL