CW 8922/08 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8922/08 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Smt. Kanti Devi & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 17/04/2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. Virendra Agrawal, for petitioner *** Instant petition has been filed by petitioner-insurer assailing order passed by Permanent Lok Adalat dt.27th June, 2008 whereby application filed by claimant respondent No.1 widow of the deceased, was allowed and insurer has been directed to make payment of assured sum which was Rs.1 lac along with interest @ 6% from the alleged date of incident which was 9th February, 2006 till its actual payment. Respondent No.1 claimant-wife of the deceased filed application before Permanent Lok Adalat in which it was alleged that her husband while driving motorcycle met with an accident and died on the spot on 9th February, 2006. This being a case of road accident, at the same time, criminal case was also registered. Since the vehicle was insured, she filed claim application before Permanent Lok Adalat on 22nd April, 2007. However, CW 8922/08 [2] pending application it was repudiated by the petitioner-insurer on 26th May, 2007 on the premise that the deceased was drunken and was not possessing driving licence and vehicle was not registered and at the same time intimation of alleged incident of 9th February, 2006 was sent to the office of petitioner on 14th March, 2007. Permanent Lok Adalat after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties and taking note of material which came on record observed that post mortem report which came on record does not disclose that deceased was under intoxication at the time of alleged date of incident and nothing was placed on record by the insurer by which it could be inferred that deceased was not holding driving licence and no certificate from the Office of RTO has been placed on record with regard to objection of vehicle being not registered. It was observed that it was a new vehicle which the deceased purchased and it might be in the process to get it registered and delay in filing claim was explained and delay in isolation could not be considered to repudiate the claim, particularly, when this fact was not controverted that deceased met with an accident on 9th February, 2006 and died at the spot, taking note of material on record finally accepted the CW 8922/08 [3] claim of the deceased with the direction to the petitioner-insurer to make payment of assured sum of Rs.1 lac along with interest @6%. Counsel for petitioner reiterated the very submissions which were made before Permanent Lok Adalat. This court does not find any substantial manifest error which has been committed by learned Permanent Lok Adalat in passing order impugned which may call for interference. Consequently, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. FRBOHRA8922CW08 17-4.doc