The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd vs Sangita Yadav on 27 June, 2025

Supreme Court – Daily Orders

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd vs Sangita Yadav on 27 June, 2025

     ITEM NO.18                            COURT NO.13                  SECTION XIV

                                S U P R E M E C O U R T O F       I N D I A
                                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s).24525/2025

     [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12-12-2024
     in MAC.APP No.655/2024 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New
     Delhi]

     The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.                                Petitioner(S)

                                                    Versus

     Sangita Yadav & Ors.                                               Respondent(S)

     IA No. 143505/2025 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING
     IA No. 143504/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
     JUDGMENT

Date : 27-06-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI

[Partial Court Working Days Bench]

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. H. Chandra Sekhar, AOR

For Respondent(s) :

Upon hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R

1. Delay condoned.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused

the material on record.

3. The petitioner-Insurance Company is before us by way

of this Special Leave Petition assailing the order passed

by the High Court whereby the compensation awarded to the
Signature Not Verified
respondents/claimants, owing to the death of one Birender
Digitally signed by
NAVEEN D
Date: 2025.06.27
16:59:25 IST
Reason: Singh, has been reduced by the High Court from a sum of

Rs.78,81,865/- (Rupees Seventy Eight Lakhs Eighty One

1
Thousand Eight Hundred and Sixty Five only, awarded by the

Tribunal) to Rs.70,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Lakhs only).

4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner

is that the claimants did not lead any evidence to show the

involvement of the insured vehicle in the accident. We are

of the firm view that the two competent forums i.e., the

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the High Court have

concurrently recorded findings of fact holding that the

involvement of the insured vehicle in the accident was well

established.

5. Thus, we are not inclined to interfere with such

concurrent findings of fact while exercising the

extraordinary jurisdiction conferred upon this Court under

Article 136 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the

Special Leave Petition is dismissed as being devoid of

merits.

6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed

of.

  (D. NAVEEN)                                       (ANJU KAPOOR)
COURT MASTER (SH)                                 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR




                               2