CM(M).No.653/2008 Page 1 of 3 6 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M).No.653/2008 Date of Decision: 4th March, 2010 % GEETA PARASHAR ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. M.K. Vashisht, Adv. versus UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD. ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Ravi Bansal, Adv. for R-1. CORAM :- THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may NO be allowed to see the Judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? NO 3. Whether the judgment should be NO reported in the Digest? JUDGMENT (Oral) CM(M) No.653/2008 1. The accident dated 21st December, 1994 resulted in the death of Prabhu Dayal. The deceased was survived by his widow and two minor children who filed the claim petition before the Claims Tribunal. 2. The offending vehicle was owned by Nawal Kishore Sharma at the time of the accident. The Claims Tribunal passed the award against the respondent. The Claims Tribunal also granted recovery rights to the respondent to recover the award amount from the driver, Prem Singh and the owner, Nawal Kishore Sharma after making the payment of the award amount to the claimants. CM(M).No.653/2008 Page 2 of 3 3. The respondent has paid the award amount to the claimants and has filed the recovery proceeding against the driver, Prem Singh and the owner, Nawal Kishore Sharma. 4. Nawal Kishore Sharma expired during the pendency of the proceeding before the Claims Tribunal on 9th May, 2002. The award was passed on 13th April, 2004. 5. The petitioner herein is the widow of Nawal Kishore Sharma and she has filed the objections in the execution proceedings on various grounds inter-alia that the award has been passed against a dead person, namely, Nawal Kishore Sharma who expired on 9th May, 2002. The objections have not been disposed of by the Claims Tribunal. 6. The petitioner has challenged the execution proceedings filed by the respondent against the petitioner. 7. The present petition is premature in as much as the Claims Tribunal has not passed any order on the objections filed by the petitioner. The petition is, therefore, dismissed as premature. 8. The Claims Tribunal shall consider and dispose of the objections filed by the petitioner in accordance with law and till then, the execution of the impugned award against the petitioner shall remain stayed. 9. All pending applications stand disposed of. 10. The parties are directed to appear before the Claims Tribunal on 22nd March, 2010. CM(M).No.653/2008 Page 3 of 3 11. Copy of this order be given ‘Dasti’ to learned counsel for the parties under signature of Court Master. 12. Copy of this order be sent to the Claims Tribunal for compliance. J.R. MIDHA, J MARCH 04, 2010 mk