Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
26 2021 United India Insurance Co. ... vs 5 Pradip Roy & Ors on 8 November, 2021
Ct.
No. 08.11 F.M.A. 238 of 2011
26 2021 United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Vs.
5 Pradip Roy & Ors.
& With
6 F.M.A. 708 of 2011
Pradip Roy & Anr.
akb Vs.
The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.
Mr. Parimal Kumar Pahari ...For the Appellant United India
Insurance Co. in FMA 238 of 2011
& Respondent No. 1 in FMA 708 of
Mr. Rajesh Singh ...For the Respondent No. 2 New
India Assurance in FMA 708 of
Mr. Jayanta Banerjee ...For the Respondents/Claimants in
FMA 238 of 2011 & Appellants
Claimants in FMA 708 of 2011
By consent of the parties, both the appeals are
taken up for hearing analogously, as both the appeals are
directed against the common judgment and award.
Both the appeals are directed against the common
judgement and award dated 31.07.2010, passed by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, 9th
Court, Alipore in M.A.C. Case No. 136 of 2000 (M.A.C.
Case No.47 of 2009) on a claim under Section 166 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 praying for compensation for the
death of Smt. 'Anita Ray (Mukherjee)' in a vehicular
accident dated January 18, 2000.
The Appeals are taken up for hearing
simultaneously to avoid conflict of decisions. The accident
leading to the filing of these two appeals, involves two
separate vehicles. In first of such appeals, being FMA 238
of 2011 filed by United India Insurance Company Limited,
the insurer of one of the offending vehicles, challenges the
imposition of entire liability of satisfaction of award on it
and questions the exoneration of The New India Assurance
Company Limited, being the insurer of other involved
vehicle in the accident, from any liability. In this appeal,
United India also assails the quantum assessed.
The other appeal, being FMA 708 of 2011 is filed
by the claimants for enhancement of compensation amount
under various heads.
Mr. Parimal Kumar Pahari, the learned Advocate
appearing for United India Insurance Company Limited
contends that although two vehicles were involved in the
accident, learned Tribunal erred in fastening the entire
liability upon United India Insurance Company Limited and
exonerating The New India Assurance Company Limited.
He also states that the quantum assessed by the learned
Tribunal, is on the higher side.
Mr. Rajesh Singh, the learned Counsel
representing The New India Assurance Company Limited,
argues that the direction of the Learned Tribunal in respect
of fixing the liability to pay the entire compensation by
United India Insurance Company Limited is justified and
cannot be interfered with as the vehicle (Oil Tanker) insured
with 'United India' was solely responsible for the accident.
He further submits that the other vehicle, being Bus No.
WBR-2735 insured with 'New India' was stationary at the
time of accident and had no role to play in the accident. He
further submits that the compensation awarded by the
learned Tribunal is just and reasonable and there is no
further scope of enhancement of the same.
Mr. Jayanta Banerjee, the learned Counsel for the
claimants prays for enhancement of the compensation
amount.
Upon hearing the Ld. Advocates and going through
the materials on record, I find that the Learned Tribunal
rightly imposed the entire liability upon United India
Insurance Company Limited. The other vehicle, insured with
The New India, was stationary. The Oil Tanker insured with
United India Insurance Company Limited was rash and
negligent and solely responsible for the accident. In view of
the aforesaid, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned
order does not require any interference on the point of fixing
of liability. The appeal of the insurer, being FMA 238 of
2011 is devoid of any merit and is accordingly dismissed.
At this stage, Mr. Pahari, the learned Advocate for
'United India Insurance Company Limited' submits that his
client has already deposited the entire awarded sum of
Rs.29,50,000/- with the learned Registrar General of this
Court in the year 2011. The said amount has been invested in
a short term interest bearing fixed deposit. It is also
submitted that in terms of further direction of this Court,
claimants have already withdrawn Rs.15,00,000/- from the
said deposit.
The accident is of the year 2000. Now, the
claimants agree to withdraw the balance principal sum of
Rs.14,50,000/- along with all accrued interest from the office
of the Registrar General, High Court, Calcutta. Accordingly,
the claimants/respondents shall furnish particulars of their
respective Bank accounts with the Registrar General of this
Court as expeditiously as possible. Upon receipt of such
details, the Registrar General is directed to pay the aforesaid
deposited amount along with accrued interest, directly into
the claimants' bank account, in accordance with law and in
the same proportion as decided by the Court below within a
period of four weeks. The Registrar General shall check the
veracity of the bank accounts and the identity of the
claimants before disbursing the amounts.
With the aforesaid directions, both the above
appeals being FMA 238 of 2011 and FMA 708 of 2011 are
disposed of.
In view of the disposal of the appeals, connected
applications, if any, are also disposed of. The concerned
Department is directed to tag the applications, if any, with
the main appeals.
There shall be no further order as to costs.
LCR, if any, may be returned back to the court
below.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if
applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance of all
formalities, on priority basis.
( Shekhar B. Saraf, J.)
