Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Co. ... vs Smti. Romita Kumari And 3 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 2119 Gua

                                                                    Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010115232021




                       THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                         Case No. : MACApp./180/2021

         HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
         HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AND HEAD OFFICE AT RAMON HOUSE,
         H.T. PAREKH MARG, 169, BACKBAY RECLAMATION, MUMBAI-400020 AND
         ITS GUWAHATI BRANCH OFFICE AT ADITYAM BUILDING, 6TH FLOOR,
         LACHIT NAGAR, GS ROAD, GUWAHATI, ASSAM-781007



         VERSUS

         SMTI. ROMITA KUMARI AND 3 ORS.
         SISTER OF LATE RAM PRASAD, R/O VILL-BOGIBEEL, BIN PATTY, P.S.-
         BORBARUAH, DIST-DIBRUGARH, ASSAM, PIN-786006

         2:SAHADEW PRASAD BIN
          FATHER OF LATE RAM PRASAD
          R/O VILL-BOGIBEEL
          BIN PATTY
          P.S.-BORBARUAH
          DIST-DIBRUGARH
         ASSAM
          PIN-786006

         3:RUHINI CHUTIA
          S/O LATE LAKHIRAM CHUTIA
         VILL NO. 1 TILAIJAN
          P.S.-MORAN
          DIST-DIBRUGARH
         ASSAM
          PIN-785669 (OWNER OF VEHICLE NO. AS-06/M-0233)

         4:MITHUAL TOPNO
          S/O SRI JOIAN TOPNO
         VILL-0DOOMAR DALLANG
                                                                              Page No.# 2/3

             KHOWANG
             P.S.-MORAN
             DIST-DIBRUGARH
             ASSAM
             PINCODE- (DRIVER OF VEHICLE NO. AS-06/M-0233

Advocate for the Petitioner    : MR. R GOSWAMI

Advocate for the Respondent :




                                    BEFORE
                     HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

                                           ORDER

Date : 09.09.2021 Heard Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel for the appellant. This is a statutory appeal filed by the appellant company against the Judgment dated 29.05.2021 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.1, Kamrup, Guwahati in MAC Case No. 329/2017.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is a case of death and the claims have been made by the father and the sister of the deceased. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the nature of compensation arrived at by the Tribunal is contrary to the provisions of law as settled by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and Others Vs Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC

121. The learned counsel submits that as per 'Sarla Verma' it is the mother who is considered to be the dependent in case of a deceased son, however in the present case, it is the father and the sister who are the claimants. The learned counsel for the Page No.# 3/3

appellant further submits that the manner in which the compensation is arrived at is in conflict with the provisions of law. Therefore, the appellant is aggrieved by the compensation awarded to the family members of the deceased namely the claimants.

The learned counsel for the appellant has been heard. Grounds urged in the Appeal Memo have also been duly perused.

It is seen that the statutory deposit of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) only is also made by the appellant before the Registry of the Court.

Admit the appeal. Call for the records of MAC Case No. 329/2017 from Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.1, Kamrup, Guwahati.

The steps on the respondent be taken by usual course and by Registered Post with A/D within a period of 1 (one) week from today.

List after service of Notice.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant