United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Smti Suko Kumari Tanti And 3 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 3979 Gua

                                                               Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010001772016




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

                          Case No. : MACApp./644/2022

         UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD
         HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 24, WHITES ROAD, MADRAS AND
         REGIONAL OFFICE AT G.S. ROAD, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 781005,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER



         VERSUS

         SMTI SUKO KUMARI TANTI and 3 ORS
         W/O SRI KULARAM TANTI

         2:KULARAM TANTI
          S/O LATE SATRUGHAN TANTI BOTH ARE R/O NUMALIGARH
         TEA ESTATE
          NO. 5 LINE
          P.O. NUMALIGARH
          P.S. GOLAGHAT
          DIST. GOLAGHAT
         ASSAM

         3:MD. JAHIDUR RAHMAN
          S/O LATE AJIJUR RAHMAN
          R/O PUB DAGAON
          P.O. BOKAKHAT
          DIST. GOLAGHAT
         ASSAM
          OWNER OF VEHICLE BEARING REGD. NO. AS-05/C-0986

         4:TILAK DAS

          S/O SRI GEJAL DAS
          R/O VILL. NO. 1
          GORAIMARI GAON
                                                                             Page No.# 2/3

             P.O. KAMARGAON
             DIST. GOLAGHAT
             ASSAM DRIVER OF VEHICLE BEARING REGD. NO. AS-05/C-098

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MS. N MODI

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. N M DUTTA



                                        BEFORE
                    HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI
                                         ORDER

30.09.2022 Heard Mr S Dutta, learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company and Mr N M Dutta, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

The appellant/Insurance Company has preferred the appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Award dated 07.07.2015, passed by the learned member, MACT, Golaghat, in MAC Case No. 54/2013.

The appeal is admitted.

As the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 has entered his appearance, no formal notice is necessary.

However, requisite extra copies of the petition be furnished to the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

Regarding the respondent Nos. 3 and 4, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are the owner and driver of the offending vehicle, respectively, and as they have preferred the appeal only on the quantum of compensation, so their presence is not necessary in the proceeding and as such, he has prayed that the names of respondent Nos. 3 and 4 be struck off from the array of respondents.

Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant, let the Page No.# 3/3

names of respondent Nos. 3 and 4 be struck off from the array of respondents in the Cause Title of the appeal, at the risk of the appellant.

Registry is directed to do the needful, in this regard.

Call for the LCR.

List the matter accordingly, after 4 (four) weeks.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant