Sumitra Devi vs Vandana Kumari
2025 Latest Caselaw 5026 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Sumitra Devi vs Vandana Kumari on 22 April, 2025

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                                                          ( 2025:JHHC:12048 )

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    C.M.P. 990 of 2024

 Sumitra Devi, aged about 63 years, Wife of Late Nawal Kishore Singh,
 resident of at Kadma Road, Kadma, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribag, District-
 Hazaribag, Jharkhand and permanent resident of at House No. 70 HC,
 HEC, Sec-2, Dhurwa, P.O.- Dhurwa, P.S.- Jagarnathpur, District- Ranchi,
 Jharkhand.                                    ..... Petitioner
                           Versus
1. Vandana Kumari, Wife of Late Sumit Kumar.
2. Om Anagh, aged about 7 years, Son of Late Sumit Kumar through his
   natural guardianship of his mother namely Vandan Kumari.
   Both resident of Flat No. 201, Tushar Enclave, Patel Nagar, Road No. 15,
   Hatia, P.O.- Hatia, P.S.- Jagarnathpur, District- Ranchi, Jharkhnad.
3. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, 1st Floor, Lake
   View Tower, Opposite Canara Bank, Doranda, P.O. & P.S.- Doranda,
   District- Ranchi, Jharkhand- 834002.
                                               ..... Opposite Parties
                           ---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

--------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate. For the O.P. No. 1 and 2 : Mr. Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, Advocate. For the O.P. No. 3 : Mr. Nikhil Ranjan, Advocate.

---------

Order No. 06 /Dated: 22th April, 2025

1. Heard, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the O.P. No. 1 and 2 as well as learned counsel appearing for the O.P. No. 3.

2. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 06.04.2024 passed in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 132 of 2001 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal, Ranchi.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the case is arising out of Motor Accident Claim and the deceased, namely, Sumit Kumar, who died on 20.04.2020 due to road accident and the Claim was filed by mother being Case No. 16 of 2021 on 11.02.2021 in the court of learned Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claim Tribunal at Hazaribag for claim of compensation for the death of his son, wherein the respondent no. 1 is also impleaded as party.

Page | 1 ( 2025:JHHC:12048 )

4. He submits that the another case was also filed by the wife of the deceased. He then submits that the respondent no. 1 is the wife of the deceased, namely, (Sumit Kumar) and she has filed a Claim Petition bearing M.A.C.T. No. 132 of 2021 before the Claim Tribunal at Ranchi on 07.04.2021.

5. He further submits that a petition has been filed under Section 10 of CPC for staying the proceeding till disposal of Claim Case No. 16 of 2021, pending before the learned M.A.C.T. Hazaribag, which was opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent no. 1. He then submits that the petitioner has relied in the case of Gohar Mohammed Versus Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation & Others SCC 381 and further requested the learned court to pass order to transfer the said case to Hazaribag, where the first Claim case was filed.

6. He also submits that the learned court has been pleased to reject the said petition saying that no direction has been received from the office of the Registrar General of High Court. In this background, he submits that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is not taken into right perspective by the learned court. In view of that the appropriate direction may kindly be issued.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 3 Insurance Company submits that the law is well settled in light of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court. At the first place of Claim case, Claim case is maintainable and the other cases are required to be transferred to the court where the first claim petition was filed.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the O.P. No.1 and 2 opposed the prayer and submits that they will be put to hardship. However, he is not in a position to dispute the law lay down in the case of Gohar Mohammed Versus Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation & Others.

9. In view of the above submissions, it is admitted fact that the first case was filed at Hazaribag and subsequently, the second case was filed arising out of the same accidence at Ranchi by the wife and child.

10. In the case of Gohar Mohammed Versus Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation and Others, Hon'ble Suprme Court at Para- 78.11, 78.12, 78.13 and 78.14 has held as under:

Page | 2 ( 2025:JHHC:12048 )

78.11. If the claimant(s) files an application under Section 164 or 166 of the MV Amendment Act, on receiving the information, the miscellaneous application registered under Section 149 shall be sent to the Claims Tribunal where the application under Section 164 or 166 is pending immediately by the Claims Tribunal. 78.12. In Case the claimant(s) or legal representative(s) of the deceased have filed separate claim petition(s) in the territorial jurisdiction of different High Courts, in the said situation, the first claim petition filed by the claimant(s)/legal representative(s) shall be maintained by the said Claims Tribunal and the subsequent claim petition(s) shall stand transferred to the Claims Tribunal where the first claim petition was filed and pending. It is made clear here that the claimant(s) are not required to apply before this Court seeking transfer of other claim petition(s) though filed in the territorial jurisdiction of different High Courts. The Registrars General of the High Courts shall take appropriate steps and pass appropriate order in this regard in furtherance of the directions of this Court.

78.13. if the claimant(s) takes recourse under Section 164 or 166 of the MV Amendment Act, as the case may be he/they are directed to join Nodal Officer/ designated officer of the insurance company as respondents in the claim petition as proper party of the place of accident where the FIR has been registered by the police station.

Those officers may facilitate the Claims Tribunal specifying the recourse as taken under Section 149 of the MV Amendment Act. 78.14. The Registrars General of the High Courts, States Legal Services Authority and State Judicial Academics are requested to sensitise all stakeholders as early as possible with respect to the provisions of Chapters XI and XII of the MV Amendment Act and the MV Amendment Rules, 2022 and to ensure the mandate of law.

11. In view of the above, it is crystal clear that the Hon'ble Supreme

Court has already laid down the law that if the matter arising out of

the motor accident claim case filed at one place and another, at the

first place claim case will be maintained and all cases arising out of

the same incident filed before different courts later on will be

Page | 3 ( 2025:JHHC:12048 )

transferred to the said court where first case has been instituted. The

learned Court has not passed the order of transfer to the court of

Hazaribagh only on the ground that he has not received any

communication from the Registrar (Administration) of the Jharkhand

High Court, which is not correct in light of the above judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court. When the judgment was placed before the

learned court, the spirit of that judgment was required to be considered

by the learned court.

12. In view of that, the impugned order dated 06.04.2024 passed by the

learned Presiding Officer, M.A.C.T., Ranchi is, hereby, set-aside.

13. The Motor Accident Claim Case No. 132 of 2021 pending before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ranchi shall be transferred to the Court of learned Presiding Officer, Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal at Hazaribag. The same will be tagged with Claim Case No. 16 of 2021. The learned Tribunal will proceed to decide the both cases in accordance with law.

14. The learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submits that the Insurance Company is already appearing before the learned court at Hazaribag and in view of that Para-78.13 of the case of Gohar Mohammed Versus U.P.S.R.T.C & Others (Supra) is complied.

15. Let this order be place before the learned Registrar General of High Court. He will look into the matter and particularly, the Para- 78.12 and 78.14 and we will take proper steps for compliance of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

16. This petition is allowed in above terms and disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

Simran/

Page | 4