Branch Manager vs Sanoni Kisku
2025 Latest Caselaw 7420 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Branch Manager vs Sanoni Kisku on 2 December, 2025

Author: Gautam Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Gautam Kumar Choudhary

                                                    2025:JHHC:36090



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
            M. A. No. 693 of 2017

Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office,
Kahalgaon, P.O. & P.S.-Kahalgaon, Bhagalpur, State-Bihar duly
represented through its Deputy Manager, National Insurance Company
Limited, Jharkhand Legal Cell, Kutchery Road, P.O.-G.P.O.,
P.S.-Kotwali, Dist.-Ranchi                    ....  ....          Appellant
                         Versus
1. Sanoni Kisku, W/o Late Bikram Soren
2. Maku Marandi, W/o Bishnu Soren
3. Bishnu Soren, S/o Late Thakur Soren
4. Shanti Soren (minor), D/o Late Bikram Soren
5. Premlal Soren (minor), S/o Late Bikram Soren
6. Meena Soren (minor), D/o Lte Bikram Soren
7. Lalita Soren (minor), D/o Late Bikram Soren, Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 are
minors and are duly represented through their mother and natural guardian
namely, Sanoni Kisku, All R/o Village- Beldiha Sampur, P.O. & P.S.-
Lalmatiya, Dist.-Godda
8. Pandav Kumar Yadav, S/o Bhola Prasad Yadav, R/o Village-Bhuska Hat,
P.O. - Tularam Bhuska, P.S.-Meharma, Dist.-Godda .... .... Respondents
                           -----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

-----

For the Appellant : Mr. Pratyush Kumar, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Purnendu Kr. Jha, Advocate Ms. Vani Kumari, Advocate Ms. Manisha Shaily, Advocate

-----

Oral Order 12 / Dated : 02.12.2025

1. The Insurance Company is in appeal against the judgment and award of compensation under Section 166 of M.V. Act in MACC No. 27/2010, whereby and whereunder, the liability to pay compensation amount has been fixed on the appellant Insurance Company.

2. The factum of accident is not under challenge. It is also not disputed either in the Tribunal or before this Court that the offending vehicle being Tractor bearing Registration No. JH17A/6197 was under the insurance cover of the appellant Insurance Company.

3. The main ground for assailing the judgment and liability is that there was a fundamental breach of terms and conditions of insurance policy as the deceased was travelling on the tractor sitting beside the driver and on the body of the tractor which is impermissible and, therefore, it 2025:JHHC:36090

amounted to a fundamental breach of carrying a gratuitous passenger on the body of the vehicle.

4. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the right to recovery has already been granted to the Insurance Company and the Insurance Company cannot be absolved from paying the compensation in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in (2018) 10 SCC 432 (Shivraj Vs. Rajendra & Anr.) which involved a case where the deceased was travelling as a coolie in the tractor and the Hon'ble Apex Court held that this cannot be a ground to exempt the Insurance Company from any liability.

5. Having considered the submissions and the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Shivraj case (supra), I find that the ground taken for exemption of liability is not sustainable. Accordingly, this Misc. Appeal stands dismissed. Pending I.A, if any, stands disposed of.

Statutory amount deposited by the Appellant- Insurance Company be remitted to the Tribunal for disbursement to the claimants against the final compensation amount.

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) AKT/Satendra Uploaded 04.12.2025