Jharkhand High Court
Raj Kumar Roy vs Narayan Kewat & Anr on 9 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
(Civil Miscellaneous Appellate Jurisdiction)
M.A. No.725 of 2018
Raj Kumar Roy ..... ...... Appellant
Versus
Narayan Kewat & Anr. .... .... Respondents
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
-------
For the Appellant : Mr. Abdul Kalam Rashidi, Advocate
For the Respondent :
--------
The matter is being taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsel
for the appellant has no objection with it and submitted that audio and video
qualities are good.
Order No.07 /Dated: 09th May, 2023
Heard, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Abdul Kalam Rashidi.
Raj Kumar Roy, S/o Abhilash Roy, owner of the offending
motorcycle bearing Registration No.JH-10Z-8610 has preferred this
miscellaneous appeal against the award dated 31.08.2018 passed by learned
District Judge-VIII-cum-MACT, Dhanbad in Motor Accident Claim Case
No.247 of 2013, whereby the claimant Narayan Kewat has been awarded a
compensation to the tune of Rs.7,10,400/- along with interest @ 6 % per
annum from the date of filing of the claim application i.e., 16.09.2013 till its
realization.
Learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Abdul Kalam Rashidi has
submitted, that admitted case of the appellant is that the learned Tribunal has
not considered the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court with
regard to the liability in a contributory negligence of two vehicles and has
placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of Minu Rout & Anr. Vs. Satya Pradyumna Mohapatra & Ors. reported in
(2013) 10 SCC 695 and in the case of Pawan Kumar & Anr. Vs. Harkishan
Dass Mohan Lal & Ors. reported in (2014) 3 SCC 590 and also in the case
of Khenyei Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. reported in (2015) 9
SCC 273 and has submitted that though there is a collision between two
vehicles but learned Tribunal has not considered the same while deciding the
issue no.5 with regard to contributory liability in the said accident.
Learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Abdul Kalam Rashidi has
further submitted, that nothing has been awarded against the Auto Rickshaw
in which the deceased was travelling.
Learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Abdul Kalam Rashidi has
thus submitted, that the impugned order is bad in law and may be set aside.
Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the
appellant, Mr. Abdul Kalam Rashidi and judgment cited by the learned
counsel for the appellant as referred above, it appears that the case of Minu
Rout and Ant. (Supra) and Pawan Kumar and Ors. (Supra) with regard to
the contributory negligence is not applicable in the present case.
The fact of the present case is that Viswanath Kewat was travelling
as a bonafide passenger in Auto Rickshaw bearing Registration No.BHT-
9175 along with his brother namely Shivnath Kewat. When they reached on
G.T. Raod near Khudia Fatak within P.S. Nirsa on 27.01.2013 at about 05:00,
P.M. all of a sudden a motorcycle bearing registration no.JH-10Z-8610
belonging to the appellant namely Raj Kumar Roy being driven by its driver
rashly and negligently, dashed the Auto Rickshaw from back due to which
the Auto Rickshaw turned turtle and Vishwanath Kewat received grievous
injury and succumbed to the injuries on the same day.
From perusal of the material brought on record, it appears that Auto
Rickshaw has no fault. It is only because of the rash and negligent driving of
the motorcycle such accident took place, there is no contributory negligence
on the part of the Auto Rickshaw, which was dashed by Motorcycle from
back and thus the judgment cited by the learned counsel for the appellant in
the case of Minu Rout and Ant. (Supra) and Pawan Kumar and Ors.
(Supra) are not applicable and submission of the learned counsel for the
appellant is rejected as the learned Tribunal had rightly held that there is no
contributory negligence on the part of the deceased at para-18 of the
impugned award.
So far with regard to plea taken by the learned counsel for the
appellant that nothing has been awarded against the Auto Rickshaw, in which
deceased was travelling is concerned, this Court is of the opinion that the
learned Tribunal has rightly awarded the judgment, in view of the judgment
passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Khenyei Vs. New India
Assurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. reported in (2015) 9 SCC 273 and plea taken by
the learned counsel for the appellant is of no use, thus in view of the
observation made by this Court, the appeal being devoid of merit as
admittedly the appellant has no insurance paper of the Motorcycle is hereby
dismissed. Learned Tribunal has rightly awarded the compensation to the
tune of Rs.7,10,400/- along with interest at the rate of 6 % per annum from
the date of filing of the claim application i.e., on 16.09.2013 for an accident
which has taken place on 27.01.2013.
The appellant, Raj Kumar Roy, S/o Abhilash Roy, R/o Junkudar
Basti, Chirkunda, Kumardhubi, Dist.-Dhanbad-828202, owner of motorcycle
bearing Registration No.JH-10Z-8610 is directed to indemnify the awarded
amount along with the interest as awarded by the learned Tribunal in the
Bank account of Narayan Kewat, S/o Late Ramrup Kewat, R/o Layakdih
Nirsa, P.O & P.S. Chirkunda, District-Dhanbad (Jharkhand) within 60 days.
The statutory amount shall be remitted to the learned
Tribunal/learned Executing Court to indemnify the claimant. If the same is
found to be in excess the same shall be remitted to the appellant otherwise
the same shall be indemnified to the claimants.
The claimants are directed to furnish the account number of a
nationalized bank to the learned Tribunal/learned Executing Court within a
period two weeks.
The Executing Court as well as the Secretary, District Legal Service
Authority, Dhanbad is directed to ensure that award must be executed within
a period of three months.
The miscellaneous appeal is hereby dismissed.
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
Rohit/-
