Nagia Devi v. M/S Bajaj Allianz General Insu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Appeal No.79 of 2012 =========================================================== Nagia Devi, Wife of Bindeshwar Yadav @ Barhan Yadav, Resident of VillageChordahan, P.O.-Bhalua, P.S.-Chauparan, District-Hazaribagh, at present VillageBarwadih (Barandi), P.O.-Bhalua, P.S.-Barachatti, District-Gaya. ..........Applicant/Appellant
Versus
1. M/S Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. through its Manager Legal, Poddar Court Gate No. 3, 7th Floor 18 Rabindra Sarni Kolkata, W.B.-700001.
2. Mr. Raj Giri, Son of Sri Mangal Giri, Resident of Flat No. 29, Plot No.-D-8, Sector-6, Delhi-85.
.........Opposite Parties/Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ravindra Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : None =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKHILESH CHANDRA ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 15-01-2015 This Appeal is brought under the heading "For Orders (On Petitions)".
Interlocutory Application No. 4434 of 2012 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant.
2. This Appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the Judgment and Award, respectively, dated 26th March, 2011 and 4th May, 2011, passed by Sri Rudra
Patna High Court MA No.79 of 2012 dt.15-01-2015 2/2 Prakash Mishra, the learned 4th Additional District JudgeCum-Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Tribunal, Gaya in M.A.C. Nos. 136 of 2010 / 08 of 2009, seeking enhancement in compensation.
3. On perusal of the record it appears that an application seeking certified copy of the Judgment and Award has been filed on 13th December, 2011 which was delivered on 20th December, 2011 and then the Appeal was filed on 30th January, 2012. The interlocutory application was filed on 13th July, 2012 simply stating that the appellant has no knowledge about preparation of the Award earlier and when she (appellant) could come to know about the same on 12th December, 2011 immediately applied for copy of the same.
4. Such explanation is not at all acceptable. Accordingly, finding no merit, the Interlocutory Application No. 4434 of 2012 is hereby dismissed; consequently, the Appeal.
(Akhilesh Chandra, J) Praveen-II/- U