National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Smt. Aloka Nanda Sarkar on 3 December, 2025

Author: Gautam Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Gautam Kumar Choudhary

                                                              2025:JHHC:36298


 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                     M. A. No.365 of 2018
National Insurance Co. Ltd., through Divisional Manager, B.P. Agarwalla
Building, Dhansar, Dhanbad through Deputy Manager, Jharkhand Legal
Cell, at Kachahri Road, Beside Gopal Complex, Ranchi, PO- GPO, PS-
Kotwali, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand.
                                           .... .. ... Appellant(s)
                     Versus
 1. Smt. Aloka Nanda Sarkar, W/o Late Kalyan Kumar Sarkar
 2. Megha Sarkar, D/o Late Kalyan Kumar Sarkar
 3. Shanka Surva Sarkar, S/o Late Kalyan Kumar Sarkar
     Claimant no.3/ respondent No.3 being minor and represented through
     his natural guardian and Mother/ Respondent No.1- Smt. Aloka Nanda
     Sarkar.
     All are permanent R/o Shyam Lal Road, PO and PS- Burdwan,
     District- Burdwan (West Bengal).
     All presently R/o Qr. No.C-22, Harina Bagan Colony, PO and PS-
     Nawagarh, District- Dhanbad (Jharkhand).
 4. Smt. Binapani Chatterjee, W/o Late K. C. Chatterjee, C/o S. P.
     Chatterjee, R/o Village- Jemari, PO and PS- J. K. Nagar, District-
     Burdwan.
 5. Ved Prakash Mahato, S/o Sri Badya Nath Mahato, R/o Nutandih,
     Jagjiwan Nagar, PO and PS- Saraidhela, Dhanbad, District- Dhanbad.
 6. M/s United India Insurance Co. Ltd. through Divisional Manager,
     Rajhans Mansion, Bank More, Dhanbad, PO and PS- Bank More,
     Dhanbad, District- Dhanbad (Jharkhand).                   .
                                                     .. ... ...Respondent(s)
                           With
                     M.A. No.366 of 2018
National Insurance Co. Ltd., through Divisional Manager, B.P. Agarwalla
Building, Dhansar, PO and PS- Dhanbad through Deputy Manager,
Jharkhand Legal Cell, at Kachahri Road, Beside Gopal Complex, Ranchi,
PO- GPO, PS- Kotwali, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand.
                                                     .... .. ... Appellant(s)
                           Versus
 1. Sunanda Kundu, W/o Late Dr. Dipak Kumar Kundu
 2. Deepayan Kundu, S/o Late Dr. Dipak Kumar Kundu
 3. Debangana Kundu, D/o Late Dr. Dipak Kumar Kundu
     Respondent nos.2 and 3 being minors are represented by their
     natural guardian and mother/ Respondent No.1- Sunanda Kundu
     All are R/o Qr. No.C-40, New Colony, Jagjiwan Nagar, PO and PS-
     Saraidhela, District- Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
 4. Smt. Binapani Chatterjee, W/o Late K. C. Chatterjee, C/o S. P.
     Chatterjee, R/o Village- Jemari, PO and PS- J. K. Nagar, District-
     Burdwan.
 5. Ved Prakash Mahato, S/o Sri Badya Nath Mahato, R/o Nutandih,
     Jagjiwan Nagar, PO and PS- Saraidhela, Dhanbad, District- Dhanbad.
 6. M/s United India Insurance Co. Ltd. through Divisional Manager,
     Rajhans Mansion, Bank More, Dhanbad, PO and PS- Bank More,
     Dhanbad, District- Dhanbad (Jharkhand).
                                           ...                   Respondents
                                 With

                          M. A. No.367 of 2018.


                                   1
                                                                 2025:JHHC:36298


       National Insurance Co. Ltd., through Divisional Manager, B.P.
       Agarwalla Building, PO and PS- Dhansar, Dhanbad through Deputy
       Manager, Jharkhand Legal Cell, at Kachahri Road, Beside Gopal
       Complex, Ranchi, PO- GPO, PS- Kotwali, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand.
                                                  .... .. ... Appellant(s)
                                 Versus
       1. Sampa Mandal, W/o Late Prabir Kumar Mandal
       2. Upsana Mandal, D/o Late Prabir Kumar Mandal
           Claimant No.2/ Respondent No.2 is minor and she is represented
           through her natural guardian and mother/Respondent No.1-
           Sampa Mandal
           Both are permanent resident of Village- Kulpi, Sub Division-
           Diamond Harbor, PO and PS- Kulpi, District- 24 Pargana (South
           West Bengal).
           At present R/o Qr. No.C-24, Harina Bagan Colony, PO and PS-
           Nawagarh, District- Dhanbad, Jharkhand.
       3. Smt. Binapani Chatterjee, W/o Late K. C. Chatterjee, C/o S. P.
           Chatterjee, R/o Village- Jemari, PO and PS- J. K. Nagar, District-
           Burdwan.
       4. Ved Prakash Mahato, S/o Sri Badya Nath Mahato, R/o Nutandih,
           Jagjiwan Nagar, PO and PS- Saraidhela, Dhanbad, District-
           Dhanbad.
       5. M/s United India Insurance Co. Ltd. through Divisional Manager,
           Rajhans Mansion, Bank More, Dhanbad, PO and PS- Bank More,
           Dhanbad, District- Dhanbad (Jharkhand).
                                                  ...              Respondents
                                      ...........

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY .........

For the Appellant (s) : Mr. Amaresh Kumar, Advocate For the Resp. No.5 : Mr. Alok Lal, Advocate For the Resp. No.4 : Mr. Nikhil Kr. Mehta, Advocate ......

14/ 03.12.2025. Heard, learned counsel for the parties.

1. Since the grounds taken in all the three aforesaid Misc. Appeals by the appellant- Insurance Company is common, therefore, they are heard together and will be disposed of by the common order.

2. All the aforesaid three Misc. Appeals arise out of the common accident which took place involving Ambulance bearing Registration No.JH- 10M 6727 and a Truck bearing Registration No.WMH -5334 in which three persons namely, Kalyan Kumar Sarkar, Prabir Kumar Mandal and Dr. Dipak Kumar Kundu died in the accident, who were travelling by the said Ambulance.

3. M.A. No. 365 of 2018 has been preferred against the judgment of Award passed by Principal District Judge-cum-Presiding Officer, MACT, Dhanbad, in T (M.V.) S. No.70 of 2011.

2025:JHHC:36298

M.A. No. 366 of 2018 has been preferred against the judgment of Award passed by Principal District Judge-cum-Presiding Officer, MACT, Dhanbad, in T (M.V.) S. No.40 of 2011.

M.A. No. 367 of 2018 has been preferred against the judgment of Award passed by Principal District Judge-cum-Presiding Officer, MACT, Dhanbad, in T (M.V.) S. No.59 of 2011.

4. Three separate claim cases were filed by the legal heirs and dependents of the deceased which were numbered as T (M.V.) S. No.70 of 2011, T (M.V.) S. No.40 of 2011 and T (M.V.) S. No.59 of 2011 and the learned Tribunal passed three separate judgment and Award of compensation in favour of the claimants recording a finding that the accident took place due to composite negligence of both the drivers of Truck and Ambulance and awarded compensation under Section 166 of the M. V. Act.

5. The insurer of the truck is in appeal in all these three cases against the Award of compensation in which liability has been fixed on it to pay the compensation amount.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant- Insurance Company has further submitted that the Award of compensation as awarded by the learned Tribunal has already been deposited before the learned Tribunal.

7. It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant- Insurance Company that the driver of truck was not having a valid driving licence and the vehicle was being plied without having a valid permit. It was for this reason that the owner did not appear and contest the claim case and consequently, the permit and driving licence were not brought on record.

8. The submission is however, factually incorrect and the same will be apparent from Ext.X/4 and X/5 in T. (M.V.) S. No.59 of 2011 wherein the photocopy of Driving licence of one Madan Gope which was valid from 13.10.2000 to 03.03.2013 has been adduced into evidence. Further, permit has also been brought on record of the Truck bearing Registration No.WMH -5334 registered in the name of Smt. Binapani Chatterjee which was valid from 05.01.2011 to 01.02.2011.

9. The same is the case with T (M.V.) S. No.70 of 2011 where the Driving licence and permit both have been adduced into evidence and marked as Ext. X/4 and X/5.

2025:JHHC:36298

10. The observation of the learned Tribunal in T (M.V.) S. No.70 of 2011 that no document was filed by either of the party(s) is an error of record and will have no bearing of the present Misc. Appeals.

11. Thus, no contrary evidence has been led on behalf of the appellant- Insurance Company to show that it was an invalid permit or it was a fake driving licence.

12. Under the circumstances, the plea that there was fundamental breach of the Insurance Company is not sustainable in the eyes of law.

13. All these three Misc. Appeals being devoid of merit stands dismissed. Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.

14. In view of the submission that the Award of compensation has already been deposited before the learned Tribunal, Office is directed to refund the statutory amount of the each Misc. Appeal deposited at the time of preferring the instant Misc. Appeal to the appellant- Insurance Company at once. Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)

Sandeep/-

Uploaded 5.12.2025.