Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/7 vs The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. And 2 ... on 13 February, 2025
Page No.# 1/7
GAHC010037612019
2025:GAU-AS:1470
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : MACApp./157/2019
DILOWARA BEGUM (WIFE) AND 5 ORS
W/O- LATE BUDDUSH ALI
2: MD. AYNAL HOQUE (MINOR SON)
S/O- LATE BUDDUSH ALI
3: NARZINA BEGUM (MINOR DAUGHTER)
D/O- LATE BUDDUSH ALI
4: HAFIJA PARBIN (MINOR DAUGHTER)
D/O- LATE BUDDUSH ALI
5: FAJAR ALI (FATHER)
S/O- LATE CHANDU ULLAH
6: RUPA KHATUN (MOTHER)
W/O- FAJAR ALI
ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF VILL.- SARU ARIKATA
P.O.- MAHTOLI
P.S. BOKO
DIST.- KAMRUP (R)
ASSAM
PIN- 78112
VERSUS
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND 2 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ABC,
BHANGAGHAR, GUWAHATI-5, KAMRUP (M), ASSAM
2:ABDUL JALIL
S/O- ABDUL HUSSAIN
Page No.# 2/7
R/O- VILL.- TOPER PATHAR
P.S. CHHAYGAON
DIST.- KAMRUP (R)
ASSAM
PIN- 781138
3:HANIF ALI
S/O- SHOMEJ ALI
R/O- VILL.- BHULUKABARI
P.S. CHHAYGAON
DIST.- KAMRUP (R)
ASSAM
PIN- 78113
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A MANNAF, MS F BEGUM,MS J BEGUM
Advocate for the Respondent : MS R BEGUM (R1), MR. N SHARMA (R1),MR. J A AHMED,MR R
B ISLAM
Linked Case : MACApp./323/2019
KHADIJA BEGUM AND 3 ORS.
W/O- LATE ZAHRUL HOQUE @ ZAHIRUL HOQUE
R/O- VILL.- CHAMPUPARA GAON
P.O. CHAMPUPARA BAZAR
P.S. CHHAYGAON
DIST.- KAMRUP
ASSAM
PIN- 781124.
2: ZERIFA PARBIN (MINOR)
D/O- LATE ZAHRUL HOQUE @ ZAHIRUL HOQUE
R/O- VILL.- CHAMPUPARA GAON
P.O. CHAMPUPARA BAZAR
P.S. CHHAYGAON
DIST.- KAMRUP
ASSAM
PIN- 781124.
3: KHURSED ALI
S/O- LATE HAZI RUSTAM ALI
R/O- VILL.- CHAMPUPARA GAON
Page No.# 3/7
P.O. CHAMPUPARA BAZAR
P.S. CHHAYGAON
DIST.- KAMRUP
ASSAM
PIN- 781124.
4: SHALEHA KHATUN
W/O- KHURSED ALI
R/O- VILL.- CHAMPUPARA GAON
P.O. CHAMPUPARA BAZAR
P.S. CHHAYGAON
DIST.- KAMRUP
ASSAM
PIN- 781124.
VERSUS
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND 2 ORS
REP. BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER
REGIONAL OFFICE
ABC
BHANGAGARH
GUWAHATI-5
KAMRUP(M)
ASSAM. (INSURER OF THE OFFENDING VEHICLE).
2:ABDUL JALIL
S/O- ABDUL HUSSAIN
R/O- VILL.- TOPER PATHAR
P.S. CHHAYGAON
DIST.- KAMRUP(R)
ASSAM
PIN- 781138. (OWNER OF THE OFFENDING VEHICLE).
3:HANIF ALI
S/O- SHOMEJ ALI
R/O- VILL.- BHULUKABARI
P.S. CHHAYGAON
DIST.- KAMRUP(R)
ASSAM
PIN- 781136. (DRIVER OF THE OFFENDING VEHICLE).
------------
Advocate for : MR. A MANNAF
Advocate for : MS R BEGUM (R1) appearing for THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE
CO. LTD. AND 2 ORS
Page No.# 4/7
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG
ORDER
Date : 13.02.2025
Heard Mr. A. Mannaf, learned counsel for the appellants along
with Ms. R. Begum, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 and Mr. J.
A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondents no.2 and 3.
2. It is seen that MACApp. No.157/2019 is analogous with the
MACApp. No.323/2019 both arising out of a common judgment and
award in MAC Case No.19/2018 dated 13.12.2018 therefore both the
matters are being heard together.
3. The facts of the case as projected by the appellants is that on
14.01.2018 at about 7:00 p.m. while the deceased Zahurul Hoque @
Zahirul Hoque and Budhush Ali on their way to the house of Budhush
Ali on foot, met with an accident at Jorsimuli, when the Tractor bearing
no. AS-25-CC-6780 was driving in very negligent and rash manner. Due
to the accident, both, namely, Zahurul Hoque @ Zahirul Hoque and
Budhush Ali died on the spot. The appellants being the legal-heirs of
the deceased persons had filed an application under Section 166 of the
Motor Vehicles Act claiming for compensation amounting to
Rs.30,00,000/- in MAC Case No.19/2018.
4. Thereafter the parties adduced their evidence and the learned
trial court after hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel
for both the parties dismissed the claimed application on the grounds
that there was a newspaper publication in the Assamese namely
"Pratidin", which was published on 15.01.2018. As per the newspaper
Page No.# 5/7
publication, the said deceased Zahurul Hoque @ Zahirul Hoque was
driving the tractor and Budhush Ali was a labour, where the said
vehicle capsized when the driver lost control while the said vehicle
tried running with sand from the river bank.
5. The learned Tribunal was of the of the opinion that the said
news paper publication was not challenged by the claimants and
further there was a delay in filing of the FIR, which was filed on
09.02.2018, while the accident took place on 14.01.2018. Thus on the
grounds of the delay in filing the FIR and the accident as projected in
the newspaper publication, which was not under challenge, the
application of the claimants was dismissed by the learned Tribunal.
6. Mr. A. Mannaf, the learned counsel for the appellants
submitted that even though there was a delay in filing the FIR, the
reason for the appeal has been explained in the FIR and that it was
also mentioned that there was a GD entry made on 14.01.2018.
7. He further submitted that the editor of the newspaper
clipping was also not examined before the learned trial court and
therefore the correctness of incident described in the newspaper
clipping is not proved.
8. Ms. R. Begum, the learned counsel for the respondent no.1
on the other hand submitted that the FIR dated 09.02.2018 simply
mentions about the GD entry was made on 14.01.2018. However, the
GD entry was not produced before the learned trial court. Learned
counsel thus submitted that since the main GD entry is not produced
before the court, it cannot be taken that there was a GD entry made
Page No.# 6/7
on the same date of the accident.
9. The learned counsel further submitted that besides of the
delay in filing of the FIR, it cannot be said that the accident had
occurred as claimed by the claimants that they were hit while they
were the pedestrians. The facts of the accident has already been
published in the newspaper dated 15.01.2018, which was duly
exhibited by the defendants before the learned Tribunal and this shows
that the deceased persons were not pedestrians when the accident
occurred on 14.01.2018.
10. She further submitted that the case IO was also not examined
before the trial court to ascertain that the accident had actually taken
place as claimed by the claimants.
11. Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsel
for both the parties, this Court on perusal of the documents on
available in the LCR, finds that the copy of the GD entry claimed to be
made on the date of the accident, i.e. 14.01.2018 was not produced
for perusal before the learned trial court. It is also seen that the case
IO was not examined, and he appear to be a necessary witness
considering the projections made by the parties.
12. In view of the above, this Court finds to fit to remand the
matter back to the learned Tribunal, wherein the GD entry in its
original should be called for and the case IO should also be examined
in the instant case for the proper adjudication of the matter.
13. If necessary, both the parties may also be given the
Page No.# 7/7
opportunity to produce further evidence as found appropriate.
14. In view of the above, impugned order MAC Case No.19/2018
dated 31.12.2018 passed by the learned Member, MACT, Kamrup,
Amingaon stands set aside.
15. Both the parties are to appear before the learned Tribunal on
02.04.2025 for necessary further steps.
16. Accordingly, MACApp. No.157/2019 along with MACApp.
No.323/2019 stands disposed of as above.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
