United India Insurance Co.Ltd vs Kamalesh Ganguly And 2 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 3179 Gua

                                                                Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010143182022




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




          I.A.(Civil)/2067/2022

         UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.
         HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT HEAD OFFICE AT 24 WHITES ROAD
         CHENNAI AND ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT G.S. ROAD
         DISPUR
         GUWAHATI AND REPRESENTED BY CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER
         GUWAHATI REGIONAL OFFICE
         G.S. ROAD
         DISPUR
         GUWAHATI.


          VERSUS

         KAMALESH GANGULY and 2 ORS
         W/O LATE N.D. GANGULY
         R/O NO. 1 MAITRA COLONY POLOFIELD ROAD
         TEZPUR
         P.O. and P.S. TEZPUR
         DIST. SONITPUR
         ASSAM.

         2:MONISH SAINI @ BOBY
         S/O BALDEV SAINI
          R/O GOROIMARI TINIALI
          P.O. GOROIMARI
          P.S. TEZPUR
          DIST. SONITPUR
         ASSAM.
          3:SHANTI RANJAN SARKAR
         S/O SRI JAGDISH SARKAR
          R/O L.D.S. ROAD
                                                                            Page No.# 2/3

              GAROWANPATTY
              TEZPUR
              P.O. and P.S. TEZPUR
              DIST. SONITPUR
              ASSAM.
              ------------
              Advocate for : MS M SAIKIA
              Advocate for : MR. S SAHU appearing for KAMALESH GANGULY and 2 ORS



              In MAC APP. 378/2022



                                   BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA

                                         ORDER

24.08.2022.

Heard Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. S. Sahu, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 and Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that he is not the insurer of the offending vehicle, but the Insurance Company of the vehicle of the victim and not at all liable to pay compensation as the offending vehicle is not insured under the applicant's company.

Heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both the sides and also after perusal of the Judgment of the learned Member MACT, Sonitpur, in MAC App. Case No. 368/2001 dated 22.11.2013, whereby the present applicant was directed to pay compensation amounting to Rs. 4,80,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Eighty Thousand) only.

Page No.# 3/3

However, considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant, I find the prayer for release of 50% of the awarded amount to the claimant cannot be considered at this stage and necessary order may be passed after hearing both sides.

The impugned Judgment and Order passed by the learned Member MACT, Sonitpur, in MAC App. Case No. 368/2001 dated 22.11.2013 is hereby stayed till the next returnable date.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant