Uma Omprakash Mishra And Others v. Mohd. Gani Sheikh Mohd. Muslim Sheikh And Others
2025:BHC-NAG:3726 940 CAF-364-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CIVIL APPLICATION (F) NO.364 OF 2023 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.2785 OF 2023 [Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. ..Vs.. Uma Omprakash Mishra and Ors.] WITH CIVIL APPLICATION (F) NO.1510 OF 2024 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.8665 OF 2024 [Uma Omprakash Mishra and Ors. ..Vs.. Mohd. Gani Sheikh Mohd. Mislum Sheikh and Ors.] ______________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders.
Mr G. I. Dipwani, Advocate for Applicant/Appellant in CAF No.364 of 2023. Mr S. Alaspurkar, Advocate for Applicants/Appellants in CAF No.1510 of 2024 and for Non-Applicant No.1, 3 to 5 in CAF No.364 of 2023.
CORAM
: M. W. CHANDWANI, J.
DATE : 28 th MARCH , 2025 .
1.
Heard.
2.
Considering the reasons mentioned in the applications and considering the no objection given by the contesting respondents, the delay in filing the appeals is hereby condoned. The appeals be registered and numbered accordingly.
3.
The civil applications are disposed of.
FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.2785 OF 2023 WITH FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.8665 OF 2024.
4.
It is submitted that respondent No.2 in First Appeal (St) No.2785 of 2023 is reported to be dead. The legal
940 CAF-364-2023 representatives of deceased respondent No.2 i.e. the wife, son, daughter-in-law i.e. wife of the pre-deceased son and the son of the pre-deceased son are already on record. The appellant is permitted to delete respondent No.2 forthwith. 5.
The parties have settled the dispute before the learned Mediator by agreement of settlement. Respondent No.1 - wife, respondent No.3 - the daughter-in-law, respondent No.4 - minor son of pre-deceased son of respondent No.2 and respondent No.5 - the brother of pre-deceased son of respondent No.2 are present. The respondent Nos.1, 3 and 5 admit the execution of the agreement of terms, whereas on another hand, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company also submits that the agreement of settlement has been executed by the company.
6.
In view of the above, the appeals are partly allowed. The appeals are disposed of in the terms contained in the settlement of agreement. Award be drawn accordingly. JUDGE Tambe