Pradip Barman vs Bajaj Allianz General Insurance ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 3408 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Pradip Barman vs Bajaj Allianz General Insurance ... on 21 February, 2025

Author: Devashis Baruah

Bench: Devashis Baruah

                                                                   Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010024292025




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

                          Case No. : MACApp./42/2025

         PRADIP BARMAN
         SON OF- LATE ARABINDA BARMAN,
         PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BALIJHAR, POST OFFICE-
         KHARSITHA, POLICE STATION - BELSOR, PIN CODE- 781370. DISTRICT-
         NALBARI, ASSAM



         VERSUS

         BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ORS
         3D FBOR, SHREEJI TOWERS, TEA WARE HOUSING, NEAR MAHINDRA
         SHOWROOM, CHRISTAIN BASTI, GUWAHATI - 781005. POLICE STATION-
         DISPUR, POST OFFICE- DISPUR, DISTRICT- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM

         2:CHANDRAMA DUTTA
         WIFE OF- SRI SANJIB KUMAR DUTTA
          RESIDENT OF- HOUSE NO. 93
          NEAR BY LANE NO. 4
          SOUTH LACHIT NAGAR
          POST OFFICE- LACHIT NAGAR
          POLICE STATION- PALTAN BAZAR
          PIN CODE- 781007

         3:SANJIB KUMAR DUTTA
          SON OF- SRI BENU DUTTA
          RESIDENT OF- HOUSE NO. 93
          NEAR BY LANE NO. 4
          SOUTH LACHIT NAGAR
          POST OFFICE- LACHIT NAGAR
          POLICE STATION- PALTAN BAZAR
          PIN CODE- 781007. DISTRICT- KAMRUP (M)
         ASSA
                                                                      Page No.# 2/3




Advocate for the appellant(s): Mr. MP Choudhury


Advocate for the respondent(s):


                                  BEFORE
                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH


                                    ORDER

21.02.2025

Heard Mr. MP Choudhury, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant.

2. This is an application under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 14.11.2024 passed in MAC Case No.907/2019 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.2, Kamrup(M) at Guwahati on the ground that the compensation so awarded by the learned Tribunal was inadequate.

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf the appellant submitted that the learned Tribunal did not grant any compensation under the heads "loss of income during treatment" as well as for "future medical treatment", although there was evidence to that effect. The learned counsel further submitted that in addition to that the learned Tribunal also did not take into account the loss of income, which the appellant would occasion in future.

4. Taking into account the above grounds of objection, this Court admits the appeal.

Page No.# 3/3

5. Call for the records.

6. Steps upon the respondents be taken by way of registered post with A/D as well as through usual process within three days.

7. List the matter after receipt of the records.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant