Page No.# 1/7 vs Abdul Aziz Sarkar @ Abdul Ajij Sarkar
2025 Latest Caselaw 4385 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/7 vs Abdul Aziz Sarkar @ Abdul Ajij Sarkar on 24 March, 2025

Author: Devashis Baruah

Bench: Devashis Baruah

                                                                 Page No.# 1/7

GAHC010056752025




                                                           2025:GAU-AS:3308

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

                       Case No. : MACApp./94/2025

         THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
         HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 3 MIDDLETON STREET, KOLKATA-
         700071 AND REGIONAL OFFICE AT G.S. ROAD, BHANGAGARH,
         GUWAHATI-5, REP BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE,
         GUWAHATI, ASSAM



         VERSUS

         ABDUL AZIZ SARKAR @ ABDUL AJIJ SARKAR
         S/O. AZMAT ALI SARKAR @ AJAMAT ALI SARKAR, R/O. VILL.
         BIDYARDABRI PART-V, P/S. GOLAKGANJ, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM.DHUBRI,
         ASSAM

         2:RABINDRA NATH PRADHANI
          R/O. VILL. AMBARI
          NEAR L.P SCHOOL
          DHIRENPARA
          GUWAHATI
         ASSAM.

         3:RAJU PRODHAN
          S/O. RABINDRA NATH PRADHANI
          R/O. VILL.- BELGURI
          P/S. AGOMONI DHUBRI
         ASSAM.

         4:ABDUL REZZAK MIAH
          S/O. ABDUL KHALEK MIAH
          R/O. VILL.- BIDYARDABRI
          PT. V
          P/S. GOLAKGANJ
          DIST. DHUBRI
                                                                              Page No.# 2/7

             ASSAM.

             5:NATIONAL INS. CO. LTD.
              REP. BY THE BRANCH MANAGER
              G.T.B ROAD
              DHUBRI BRANCH
              P/O. AND P/S.DHUBRI
              DIST. DHUBRI
             ASSA

                 For the Appellant(s)         : Mr. P. J. Barman, Advocate

                 For the Respondent(s)        : None appears.


                 Date of Hearing              : 24.03.2025

                 Date of Judgment             : 24.03.2025




                                  BEFORE
                   HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

                            JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)

Heard Mr. P. J. Barman, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant.

2. The instant appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 02.01.2025 passed in MAC Case No.15/2020(I) by the learned Member, MACT, Dhubri (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned Tribunal') whereby an amount of Rs.2,77,000/- was awarded as the just and fair compensation along with interest @7% from the date of filing of the claim proceedings till realization. In addition to that, the learned Tribunal had also directed the appellant Insurance Company to make the payment within a period of 30 days by depositing it in Page No.# 3/7

a specific account of the Tribunal as mentioned in paragraph number 25 of the impugned judgment and award.

3. The sole ground of objection taken to the impugned judgment and award is that the learned Tribunal had awarded an amount of Rs.18,000/- on the head of loss of income for a period of three months taking the income of the claimant notionally at Rs.6,000/- per month. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant Insurance Company submitted that the claimant did not bring on record any evidence to the effect that the claimant was not in a position to undertake any work for the period of three months and as such, the impugned judgment and award is required to be interfered with insofar saddling the liability of Rs.18,000/- on the head of loss of income. In that regard, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant Insurance Company drew the attention of this Court to the cross- examination of the claimant witness who had stated that he had not submitted any document that he was in continuous treatment for two months. Taking into account the said ground of objection, this Court takes up this appeal for disposal in terms with Order XLI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the Code').

4. From a perusal of the materials on record, it would transpire that on 13.02.2023, the claimant while proceeding as a pillion rider of a motorcycle bearing registration No. AS-17-G/1523 towards Halakura Bazar from his home and on the way when the aforesaid motorcycle reached near Halakura Cinema hall on NH-31 at around 5 PM, one Savari vehicle bearing Registration No. AS-01-AA/3982 driven in high speed and in a reckless manner dashed the motorcycle wherein the claimant was riding resulting in Page No.# 4/7

injury to the claimant. The claimant further stated in his claim petition that he was taken initially to the Mission Hospital, Cooch Behar from where he was shifted to Dispur Polyclinic, Guwahati where he undertook treatment as indoor patient from 14.02.2017 to 16.02.2017 and again from 09.03.2017 to 10.03.2017.

5. It is the case of the claimant that on account of the accident, he had sustained multiple pelvic bone fracture along with urethral injury and haematoma around the symphysis public, vertical fracture at the left side of the sacrum with involvement of left sided sacral foramina, dislocation of right shoulder joint besides other injuries due to the said accident. The claimant also claimed that he had incurred an expenditure of Rs.2,75,000/- on account of medical treatment and he being a carpenter used to earn Rs.15,000/- per month which he could not earn on account of the accident.

6. It is further seen from the impugned judgment itself that notices were issued and only the Appellant Insurance Company appeared and contested the proceedings by filing the written statement. The learned Tribunal on the basis of the written statement had framed four issues which are reproduced herein under:

"(i) Whether the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicles No.AS-01-AA/3982 (Savari) and AS-17-G/1523 (motorcycle) and the claimant sustained injuries due to the said accident.

(ii) Whether both the offending vehicles were duly insured with National Insurance Company Limited at the time of accident?

(iii) What shall be the just and proper compensation and by whom payable?

Page No.# 5/7

(iv) Whether the claimant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for?"

7. On behalf of the claimant two witnesses were adduced. The appellant Insurance Company however did not adduce any evidence.

8. The learned Tribunal vide the impugned judgment and award dated 02.01.2025 awarded an amount of Rs.2,77,000/- along with interest @7% from the date of filing of the claim petition. It is relevant to take note of that while deciding the said claim petition, the learned Tribunal decided the Issue No.(i) holding inter alia that the accident took place on account of the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the Savari vehicle bearing Registration No. AS-01-AA/3982 and the claimant sustained injuries as a result of the aforesaid accident. In respect to the Issue No.(ii), the learned Tribunal opined that the offending vehicle bearing Registration No. AS-01- AA/3982 was duly insured with the Appellant Insurance Company. As regards the Issue Nos. (iii) and (iv), the learned Tribunal on the basis of the evidence on record came to an opinion that though the claimant had claimed an amount of Rs.2,75,000/- on account of medical expenses, but could not prove the said amount. On the basis of the evidence i.e. the medical bills, the learned Tribunal came to an opinion that the claimant would be only entitled to an amount of Rs.1,49,000/- inasmuch as the claimant had submitted medical bills, vouchers amounting to Rs.1,70,647/- and out of which, the ambulance fare was Rs.21,800/-.

9. On the head of pain and suffering, the learned Tribunal had awarded an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. In addition to that, the learned Tribunal had awarded an amount of Rs.10,000/- on the head of transportation charges. The learned Tribunal further taking into account the evidence on record, Page No.# 6/7

more particularly the discharge certificate of the Dispur Polyclinic and Nursing Home exhibited as Exhibits 3 to 6 came to an opinion that the claimant would only be entitled to an amount of Rs.18,000/- on the head of loss of income for a period of three months taking the income of the claimant notionally at Rs.6,000/- per month. On the basis thereof, the learned Tribunal had adjudged an amount of Rs.2,77,000/-.

10. This Court having perused the impugned judgment and award and taking into account the injury suffered which is not contested in the instant Appeal, it cannot be said that the learned Tribunal was not justified in awarding the amount of Rs.18,000/- on the head of loss of income. In fact, in the opinion of this Court, the learned Tribunal was very conservative in awarding the compensation. In that view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and award.

11. The Appellant Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of Rs.2,77,000/- along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition within 6 (six) weeks from the date of the instant judgment.

12. This Court further observes that upon deposit of the said amount before the learned Tribunal and an order being produced from the learned Tribunal before the Registry of this Court that the amount had been deposited, the statutory deposit of Rs.25,000/- so deposited by the Appellant Insurance Company at the time of filing of the instant appeal, be refunded by the Registry upon an application filed by the Appellant Insurance Company along with the order of the learned Tribunal.

Page No.# 7/7

13. Appeal stands accordingly dismissed. No costs.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant