Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Rupjan Nessa And 3 Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 5136 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Rupjan Nessa And 3 Ors on 30 May, 2025

Author: Devashis Baruah

Bench: Devashis Baruah

                                                                 Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010108762025




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

                          Case No. : MACApp./227/2025

         ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
         HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT ORIENTAL HOUSE, A-25/27, ASAF ALI
         ROAD, NEW DELHI-110002, AND REGIONAL OFFICE AT GUWAHATI-07, REP.
         BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER.



         VERSUS

         RUPJAN NESSA AND 3 ORS.
         W/O. LT. SAIFUL ISLAM.

         2:SALEHA KHATUN
          D/O. LT. SAIFUL ISLAM.
         RESPONDENT NO. 2 IS THE MINOR AND REP. BY RESPONDENT NO. 1
         R/O. VILLAGE MAHERIPAR
          PS JURIA
          DISTRICT NAGAON
         ASSAM
          PIN-782124.

         3:REKIB UDDIN AHEMED
          S/O. MD. IBRAHIM ALI
          R/O. VILLAGE BAGURIGURI
          PS JURIA
          DISTRICT NAGAON
         ASSAM
          PIN-782124.

         4:TEHERUL ISLAM
          S/O. LT. HAJARAT ALI
          R/O. JYOTI NAGAR
          BL-4
          H/NO. 208
                                                                     Page No.# 2/3

              BAMUNIMAIDAN
              CHANDMARI
              KAMRUP M
              ASSAM
              PIN-78102




Advocate for the appellant(s): Ms. M Choudhury


Advocate for the respondent(s):


                                  BEFORE
                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH


                                   ORDER

30.05.2025

Heard Ms. M Choudhury, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants.

2. This is an appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the impugned judgment and award dated 06.02.2025 passed by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Nagaon in MAC Case No.364/2021.

3. The grounds of objection taken in the memo of appeal are that the multiplication factor which has been applied was wrongly done taking into account the age of the victim. The learned counsel submits that the appropriate multiplication factor would be 7. In addition to that, the learned counsel referring to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Vs. Pranay Sethi and others, reported in (2017) 16 Page No.# 3/3

SCC 680, the claimants were not entitled to future prospect.

4. The learned counsel submitted that the monthly income was also wrongly arrived at.

5. This Court has also taken note of paragraph Nos.14 and 15 of the judgment of the learned Tribunal and is of the opinion that the said ground of objection is misconceived.

6. Considering the two grounds above mentioned, the appeal is admitted.

7. Call for the records.

8. Steps for service of notice upon the respondents by way of registered post with A/D as well as through usual process within 3(three) days from today.

9. List the appeal on completion of service and after receipt of the LCR.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant