New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Basker Nath And Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 155 J&K

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Basker Nath And Others on 30 January, 2026

Author: Sanjeev Kumar

Bench: Sanjeev Kumar

                                                                             Sr. No. 15



         HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                         AT JAMMU

                                MA No. 617/2010
                                                     Date of Pronouncement: 30.01.2026
                                                                Uploaded on: 02.02.2026



New India Assurance Co. Ltd.                                       ...Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s)


                               Through :- Mr. Jugal K. Gupta, Advocate

                              v/s
  Basker Nath and others                                                       ...Respondent(s)

                              Through:-    Mr. K.L. Pandita, Advocate

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE

                                    ORDER(ORAL)

1. Impugned in this appeal filed by New India Assurance Co. Ltd. is an

award dated 31.03.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims, Tribunal

Jammu ["the Tribunal"]in file No. 134/Claim titled "Basker Nath and

Ors. Vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd. and Ors.", whereby the

Tribunal has, while allowing claim petition, awarded sum of

Rs. 8,02,438/- alongwith interest @ 7.5% per annum. Impugned award is

assailed by the appellant-Insurance Company primarily on the following

grounds:

(i) That the driver of the offending vehicle was not possessing

a valid driving license and, therefore, the appellant-

Insurance Company was absolved of its liability to

indemnify the insurer.

(ii) That the Tribunal has erroneously taken the monthly income

of the deceased as Rs. 7,160/-, whereas, as per the statement

made by PW- Usha, the actual income of the deceased was

Rs. 6,500/- per month. That the Tribunal has failed to take

into account the salary which the dependents got on the

death of the deceased in harness, as well as the other

pensionary benefits.

2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on

record, I am of the considered opinion that the award passed by the

Tribunal is perfectly legal and in consonance with the evidence on

record.

3. The death of the deceased-wife of respondent No. 1 in a Motor vehicle

Accident is not in dispute. The claimants have fully discharged the onus

of issue No. 1 and proved by leading sufficient evidence that the accident

in which the wife of respondent No. 1 lost her life on 04.11.2003,

occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle.

4. With regard to the income, not only the salary certificate of the

deceased-Ms. Girja Bhat, who was serving as teacher in the Education

Department, was placed on record, but one Ms. Usha, an employee of

school, also appeared before the Tribunal and proved the salary

certificate which was on record.

5. The Tribunal has, therefore, rightly concluded that the claimants had

successfully proved that the income of the deceased at the time of her

death was Rs. 7,160/- per month.

6. Regarding the plea of the appellant that the salary and the pensionary

benefits which the respondent No. 1 was entitled to on the untimely

demise of Ms. Girja Bhat in the Motor Vehicle Accident have not been

taken into consideration by the Tribunal, suffice it to say that the law in

this regard is now well settled. The benefits to which the appellant is

referring to are the benefits, which would have otherwise been received

by her legal heirs, even if she would have died natural death, otherwise

in a Motor Vehicle Accident. The legal position is reiterated in the recent

judgment titled "Parmod Kumar Tiwari Vs. PremLal Gautam and

others" Manu/SC/0866/2025 decided on 08.04.2025.

7. So far as the plea of the appellant that the driver of the offending vehicle

was not possessing a valid driving license at the time of accident is

concerned, it would be sufficient to say that the onus to prove the

aforesaid issue was on the Insurance Company, but the same has not

been discharged.

8. In view of the aforesaid, I find no merit in the grounds of challenge

urged on behalf of the appellant. The appeal is found devoid of any merit

and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

9. The amount deposited before the Registry shall be released in favour of

the rightful claimants after due verification and identification, in terms of

the impugned award.

(Sanjeev Kumar) Judge

JAMMU 30.01.2026 Rahul Sharma

Whether the order is speaking? : Yes/No

Whether the order is reportable? : Yes/No