United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Guniya Devi
2022 Latest Caselaw 1819 Jhar

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                  M.A. No. 183 of 2016
        United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Bokaro............ Appellants
                                   Versus
        1. Guniya Devi
        2. Chaita Mahto
        3. Manju Kumari
        4. Anju KUmari
        5. Sanju Kumari
        6. B.K.B. Transport Private Ltd, Ranchi
        7. Gendu Giri............                                    Respondents
                                   ......

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen ......

        For the Appellants               : Mr. Alok Lal, Advocate
        For Respondent No.6              : Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate
        For Respondent Nos. 1-5          : Mr. Abhijit Kr. Singh, Advocate
                                   ......
8/05.05.2022    An issue was framed by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claim

Tribunal, which if translated in English, will read as follows:-

"IV. Whether on the date of the accident the driver of the offending vehicle Gendu Giri possessed a valid driving license or not?

2. Mr. Alok Lal, learned counsel for the appellant- Insurance Company submitted that though this issue was framed, but in the entire judgment this issue has not been touched nor decided by the Tribunal.

3. Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 6, i.e. the owner of the vehicle also admits the aforesaid position.

4. This issue is a vital issue, which should have been decided. Without deciding the issue, the court cannot proceed to conclude as to from whom the compensation amount has to be recovered. In the situation, if the driving license is fair, proper and valid, it is the Insurance Company, who has to pay the amount of compensation, but if the finding is otherwise then the ultimate liability would be upon the owner of the vehicle and the Insurance Company will have right to recover the amount of compensation from the owner of the vehicle.

5. The Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Bermo at Tenughat (Bokaro) is, therefore, directed to decide the aforesaid issue within a period of three months from today and send the finding to this Court so that this appeal can be disposed of. The parties will be at liberty to lead evidence on the aforesaid issue.

6. The parties are directed to cooperate with M.A.C.T., Bermo at Tenughat in Claim Case No. 102 of 2011. If any of the parties, i.e. the owner of the vehicle and/or the Insurance Company fails to cooperate, the Tribunal will be at liberty to proceed in their absence.

7. Since the factum of insurance is admitted, if the issue is answered in favour of the Insurance Company, the Insurance Company at best can only claim the right of recovery. Considering the aforesaid fact, I direct the Insurance Company to satisfy the award in the meantime, and iinform this Court by filing necessary affidavit.

8. List this appeal after four months.

9. Let this order be communicated to the court concerned immediately through FAX.

(Ananda Sen, J) Mukund/-cp.2