National Insurance Company Limited v. Samarjeet Khalkho
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (227) No. 937 of 2018 National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Division Manager, Divisional Officer Vyapar Vihar road, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ----Petitioner/Insurance Company
Versus
1. Samarjeet Khalkho, S/o. Iliyas Khalkho, aged about 38 years;
2. Smt. Lewni Khalkho, W/o. Samarjeet, aged about 37 years;
3. Minor Ku. Anchal, D/o. Samarjeet Khalkho, aged about 10 years; Respondent No. 3 is minor through next friend father Samarjeet Khalkho All are residence at Village Chandadeepa, Tahsil Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.) (Claimants)
4. Premlal Minj, S/o. Lukas Minj, aged about 39 years, Occupation Agriculture, R/o. Village Chandadeepa Sanna, Tahsil Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.) (owner) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Praveen Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. A.K. Prasad, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 11/03/2019 Heard.
(1) Against the award passed by the Claims Tribunal on 17.07.2017, the appellant/Insurance Company has filed cross-objection, in an appeal preferred by the claimants before this Court, in which, this Court vide order dated 08.01.2018 passed in MAC No. 1236 of 2017 has stayed the execution of remaining part of the award subject to depositing 50% of the award amount but despite that order, learned Claims Tribunal, by impugned order dated 9.10.2018, relying upon decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. and another Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation 1 has vacated the interim order, against which instant writ petition under Article AIR 2018 SC 2039
227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred. (2) Learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon paragraph 34 of the above-cited judgment would submit that the Claims Tribunal has misread the judgment of the Supreme Court while passing the impugned order and, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be dismissed.
(3) Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents would submit that judgment of the Supreme Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. and another (supra) would submit that judgment would be applicable in the present case where proceeding has been stayed as reflected in paragraph 34 of the aforesaid judgment. He also relied upon order of the Karnataka High Court in the matter of M/s Basava Agro World Vs. M/s International Tractor Ltd.
2 in support of his case.
(4) I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also went through the record with utmost circumspection.
(5) Supreme Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. and another (supra) has held as under:- " 34. In view of above, situation of proceedings remaining pending for long on account of stay needs to be remedied. Remedy is required not only for corruption cases but for all civil and criminal cases where on account of stay, civil and criminal proceedings are held up. At times, proceedings are adjourned sine die on account of stay. Even after stay is vacated, intimation is not received and proceedings are not taken up. In an attempt to remedy this, situation, we consider it appropriate to direct that in all pending cases where stay against proceedings of a civil or criminal trial is operating, the same will come to an end on expiry of six months from today unless in an exceptional case by a speaking order such stay is extended. In cases where stay is granted in future, the same will end on expiry of six months from the date of such order unless similar WP No. 100648/2019, decided on 10.01.2019.
extension is granted by a speaking order. The speaking order must show that the case was of such exceptional nature that continuing the stay was more important than having the trial finalized. The trial Court where order of stay of civil or criminal proceedings is produced, may fix a date not beyond six months of the order of stay so that on expiry of period of stay, proceedings can commence unless order of extension of stay is produced."
(6) Thus, miscellaneous appeal is pending against the award dated 17.02.2017 and in that appeal, cross-objection has been preferred by the appellant/Insurance Company, in which interim order has been passed by this Court on 08.01.2018. (7) In that view of the matter, matter is remitted to the Executing Court to decide the matter afresh keeping in view the paragraph 34 of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. and another (supra) and decision rendered by the Karnatka High Court in M/s Basava Agro World (supra) within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order . (8) Interim order granted earlier shall continue till decision is taken by the Claim Tribunal. (9) In view of above, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge D/-