Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, July 15: Supreme Court has allowed M/s Kashmir Goods Service to file petition for review of the J&K High Court order.
According to the case before the Supreme Court, a vehicle of M/s Kashmir Goods Service met with an accident leading to the death of conductor.
The family of the deceased filed a complaint for compensation before the Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Udhampur and during the course of the hearing M/s Kashmir Goods Service was set ex-party.
The Tribunal held that the insurance company liable to pay as a third party indemnifier in terms of the policy issued. Being aggrieved the insurance company filed appeal before the J&K High Court at Jammu praying for setting aside of the award amount.
The High Court vide order dated 08.11.2017 allowed the insurance company to recover award amount from the petitioner-owner of the offending vehicle.
Advocates Keshav Thakur appearing for M/s Kashmir Goods Service submitted before the Supreme Court that the High Court being the First Appellate Court exercising powers U/S 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 was obliged to consider the entire case on facts and law, the powers alike Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure which mandates the High Court to decide all issues of facts and law after appreciating the entire evidence.
“But unfortunately, no attempt was made to appreciate the evidence and on the contrary High Court refused owner’s vital documents indicating that the offending vehicle of the petitioner had a valid insurance package policy with liability to cover six employees and also a valid driving license endorsed to drive dangerous and hazardous vehicle”, Advocate Thakur submitted.
It was further submitted that the High Court committed gross error of law and failed to appreciate that once the petitioner is before the High Court and contesting his case a cross appeal is not necessary as it will lead to multiplicity of litigations. Further, U/S 173 the appellate court by necessary implication can exercise all powers incidental thereto and there is no curtailment or limitations on the powers of the appellate court to consider the entire case on facts and law.
After hearing counsel for the petitioner, Supreme Court bench comprising Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre and Justice Uday Umesh Lalit observed, “in our opinion, in a situation like the one, the appropriate remedy for the petitioner is to file a review petition and bring it to the notice of the High Court the endorsement made on the license”.
“We, therefore, permit the petitioner to withdraw this SLP and file appropriate review petition for review of the impugned order on the ground urged in the SLP”, Supreme Court said.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel