Gauhati High Court
United India Insurance Company Ltd vs Paloban Urang on 17 March, 2025
Author: Devashis Baruah
Bench: Devashis Baruah
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010046982025
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
I.A.(Civil)/707/2025
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AND HEAD OFFICE AT 24 WHITES ROAD
CHENNAI-600014 AND ONE OF THE REGIONAL OFFICE AT G.S. ROAD
DISPUR
GUWAHATI AND REP. BY THE CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER
GUWAHATI
REGIONAL OFFICE
G.S. ROAD
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-781005.
VERSUS
PALOBAN URANG
S/O. LT. NAGA URANG
R/O. PONKA PATHAR
P/O. KANAIGHAT
NRL OUT POST
P/S. AND DIST. GOLAGHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785699.
2:DILIP BORAH
S/O. LT. MOHEDSWAR BORAH
R/O. TONK-TONK TALI
P/O. KANAIGHAT
NRL OUTPOST
P/S. AND DIST. GOLAGHAT
ASSAM-785699.
In Case No. : MFA/9/2025
Page No.# 2/4
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AND HEAD OFFICE AT 24
WHITES ROAD, CHENNAI-600014 AND ONE OF THE REGIONAL
OFFICE AT G.S. ROAD, DISPUR, GUWAHATI AND REP. BY THE
CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER, GUWAHATI, REGIONAL OFFICE,
G.S. ROAD, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781005.
VERSUS
PALOBAN URANG
S/O. LT. NAGA URANG, R/O. PONKA PATHAR, P/O. KANAIGHAT,
NRL OUT POST, P/S. AND DIST. GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785699.
2:DILIP BORAH
S/O. LT. MOHEDSWAR BORAH
R/O. TONK-TONK TALI
P/O. KANAIGHAT
NRL OUTPOST
P/S. AND DIST. GOLAGHAT
ASSAM-785699
Advocate for the applicant(s): Mr. R Goswami
Advocate for the respondent(s): X X
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
ORDER
17.03.2025
Heard Mr. R Goswami, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
applicant.
Page No.# 3/4
2. This is an application under Order XLI Rule V of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 (for short, the Code), seeking stay of the judgment and order
dated 04.01.2025 passed by the learned Commissioner for Employee's
Compensation, Golaghat in E.C. Case No.19/2022.
3. Issue notice of motion making it returnable on 05.05.2025.
4. Steps be taken for service of notice upon the respondent No.1 by way of
registered post with A/D as well as through usual process within 3(three) days.
5. This Court is not inclined to issue notice in the instant application against
the respondent No.2.
6. I have heard Mr. R Goswami, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the applicant, Insurance Company, who had submitted that the claimant had
claimed himself to be the brother of the deceased, but taking into account the
definition of dependant defined by Section 2(1)(d) of the Employee's
Compensation Act, 1923, he would not come within the ambit of a dependant to
file a claim proceedings upon the death of the deceased.
7. He further submitted that this very aspect of the matter was duly pleaded
in the written statement filed by the appellant Insurance Company before the
learned Tribunal. But the learned Tribunal did not take into consideration the
said aspect. He, therefore, submitted that in the absence of a dependant
approaching the Court, the entire proceedings was not maintainable.
Accordingly, Mr. R Goswami, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
applicant, Insurance Company submits that the impugned judgment and order
dated 04.01.2025 passed in E.C. Case No.19/2022 is required to be stayed
pending disposal of the appeal.
8. This Court had already admitted the appeal by formulating a substantial
Page No.# 4/4
question of law.
9. This Court is prima facie of the opinion that the learned Tribunal ought to
have taken into consideration the aspect as to whether the claimant was a
dependant in terms with Section 2(1)(d) of the Employee's Compensation Act,
1923 before passing the said award. Consequently, this Court stays the
impugned judgment and order dated 04.01.2025 passed in E.C Case
No.19/2022 till the next date fixed.
10. List again on 05.05.2025.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
