United India Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Shingari Devi and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

.....of a person governed by customary law and constitutional validity of section 14 of hindu succession act. thus there is no real conflict between the two full bench judgments. both the full bench judgments have been delivered on the assumption that joginder singhs case dealt with question of alienation whereas pritam singhs case had decided the question concerning succession. even on fact in joginder singhs case the issue was validity of alienation by consent decree by a father to his two sons, which was challenged by third son, whereas in pritam singhs case the question of nature of property in hands of sons on death of their father had arisen for purposes of assessment of estate duty. in pritam singhs case the property in the hands of the sons was held to be coparcenary property and only 1/3rd of property belonging to deceased father was considered eligible for estate duty. therefore, there was no question of alienation in pritam singhs case.ajai lamba, j.1. the united india fire and general insurance company limited has come up in first appeal. learned counsel for the appellant states that although it has not been specified, however, the penalty is being recovered from the insurer in execution proceedings.2. at the time of admission of the appeal, the matter was admitted only against respondents no. 2 and 3 on the limited question of liability of paying the penalty.3. in the light of law as laid down by the hon'ble supreme court of india in ved parkash garg v. premi devi and ors. (1997-3)137 p.l.r. 606 (s.c.), the insurance company cannot be held liable to reimburse the additional amount of compensation by way of penalty and the same would be recoverable from the insured.4. in view of the law laid down in ved parkash garg's case (supra), the appeal is allowed to the extent that the penalty imposed vide the impugned award shall be recoverable from the insured and not the insurer.