National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Ruksana Khatoon
2021 Latest Caselaw 1052 Jhar

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                  [Miscellaneous Appellate Jurisdiction]
                          M.A. No. 416 of 2014
        National Insurance Co. Ltd.                    .... .. ...          Appellant(s)
                                     Versus
        1.Ruksana Khatoon
        2.Md. Muslim
        3.Md. Taslim
        4.Narayan Gope
        5.Nageshwar Singh                                        .. ... ... Respondent(s)
                          ...........

CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO (Through :-Video Conferencing) .........

      For the Appellant(s)            :    Mr. Alok Lal, Advocate.
                                           Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate
      For the Resps./claimants :           Mr. Sudhir Kr. Roy, Advocate
                            ..........

04 / 02.03.2021. Heard, learned counsel for the appellant- National Insurance Co. Ltd.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant-National Insurance Company Limited has preferred this Appeal against the Award dated 30.06.2014 passed by learned Principal District Judge-cum P.O., MVACT, Giridih, in Motor Vehicle Claim Case No.6 of 2010 whereby the claimants 1.Ruksana Khatoon, 2.Md. Muslim and 3.Md. Taslim have been awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.2,27,000/- after deducting Rs.50,000/-, which has already been paid to the claimants under Section 140 of the M.V. Act along with interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim case till the date of realization to the claimants through cheque or bank draft within two months from the date of order, failing which, the claimants are entitled to recover the compensation amount through the process of the Court.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appeal has been preferred by the insurance Company as the finding recorded by the learned Tribunal with regard to issue No."(iv) Whether the owner and the driver of the said bus were possessing valid and effective vehicular documents like permit, tax token, registration book, driving licence insurance etc., at the relevant time of the accident?

The said issue has been decided at Para 11 of impugned judgment /award, but the learned Tribunal has not considered the documents brought by the respondent as Exhibits A, B, C and D in correct perspective. As such, earlier Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has issued notice on 14.06.2018 upon the owner and driver, but even after valid service of notice upon respondent No.5 (Nageshwar Singh)/driver of the offending vehicle, he has not put his appearance. The notice upon respondent No.4, Narayan Gope, owner of the offending vehicle has been returned unserved with

report of process served that notice returned due to incorrect address.

Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that on the same address, the owner has appeared before the learned Tribunal, but this time he has managed not to appear before this Court as there is every likelihood that right of recover may be granted in favour of the Insurance Company from the owner of the vehicle by this Court, as such, this Court may call for the LCR and direct the court below to ensure the appearance of the owner of the offending vehicle.

Learned counsel for the claimants/respondents, Mr. Sudhir Kr. Roy has submitted that the appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company against the owner, but in such litigation which is pending before the learned Tribunal from the year 2010 to 2014, when the award was passed by the learned Tribunal on 30.06.2014 and thereafter 2014 to 2021 before this Court unnecessarily, as such, claimants may be indemnified the award along with interest in terms of the award passed by the learned Tribunal.

Considering such submission, Insurance Company is directed to indemnify the awarded amount along with the interest in terms of the award passed by the learned Tribunal which shall be indemnified to the claimants after due verification.

However, if such affidavit is filed within 90 days from today, the office is directed to call for LCR thereafter.

The City Superintendent of Police, Dhanbad is directed to execute bailable warrant of arrest of Rs.5,000/- with two sureties upon Respondent No.4 [ Narayan Gope, S/o Chamru Gope, resident of Dhansari Colony, Chandmari, P.O. Chandmari, P.S. Dhanwar, District-Dhanbad, owner of the Tata 709 Mini Bus bearing Registration No. JH02G 4219] through Officer-in-Charge, Dhanwar Police Station, Dhanbad

Put up this case after appearance of the owner of the vehicle or after filing of the affidavit by the appellant.

Office is directed to issue bailable warrant of arrest upon respondent No.4/ the owner of the offending vehicle.

Unutilized copy, be utilized for the same.

I.A. No.5393 of 2014 filed for limitation shall be heard after appearance of the owner.

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)

Sandeep/