Jharkhand High Court
United India Insurance Company Ltd ... vs Haria Oraon @ Haria Devi Wife Of Late ... on 5 February, 2025
Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
Misc. Appeal No. 297 of 2020
----
United India Insurance Company Ltd represented through Biswajit Das
aged about 58 years Deputy Manager United India Insurance Company
Limited, Ranchi Divisional Office, Office at Bayper Bhawan, Lalji Hirji Road,
PO -GPO, PS Kotwali, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand (Insurer of Truck
No.JH11B-7535) ....O.P.No.2/ Appellant(s)
-- Versus --
1.Haria Oraon @ Haria Devi wife of late Charwa Oraon
2.Charwa Oraon son of late Soma Oraon
3.Suchit Oraon son of Charwa Oraon
4.Sujit Oraon son of Charwa Oraon
Respondent No.3 to 4 are minor son of Haria Orain @ Haria Devi
represented through their mother and natural guardian Haria Orain @
Haria Devi i.e. Respondent No.1, all are resident of Village Chundri
Nawatoli, PO Icha, PS Ghaghra, Dist. Gumla, at present resident of Laxmi
Nagar, PO and PS Sukhdeo Nagar, District Ranchi
...Applicant/Respondent(s)
5.Anil Sahu @ Anil Kumar Sahu @ Anil Kumar Gupta son of Thakur Saw,
resident of Chandwa PO and PS Chandwa, Dist Latehar (Owner of Truck
No. JH- 11B- 7535) ... Opp.Party No.1/Respondent
With
----
United India Insurance Company Ltd represented through Biswajit Das
aged about 58 years Deputy Manager United India Insurance Company
Limited, Ranchi Divisional Office, Office at Bayper Bhawan, Lalji Hirji Road,
PO -GPO, PS Kotwali, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand (Insurer of Truck
No.JH11B-7535) ....O.P.No.2/ Appellant(s)
-- Versus --
Bando Orain @ Bando Devi and Others ... Respondents
With
----
United India Insurance Company Ltd represented through Biswajit Das
aged about 58 years Deputy Manager United India Insurance Company
Limited, Ranchi Divisional Office, Office at Bayper Bhawan, Lalji Hirji Road,
PO -GPO, PS Kotwali, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand (Insurer of Truck
No.JH11B-7535) ....O.P.No.2/ Appellant(s)
-- Versus --
Gunjari Orain @ Gunjari Devi and Others ... Respondents
With
----
United India Insurance Company Ltd represented through Biswajit Das
aged about 58 years Deputy Manager United India Insurance Company
Limited, Ranchi Divisional Office, Office at Bayper Bhawan, Lalji Hirji Road,
PO -GPO, PS Kotwali, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand (Insurer of Truck
No.JH11B-7535) ....O.P.No.2/ Appellant(s)
-- Versus --
Mangri Orain @ Mangri Devi and Others ... Respondents
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
---
For the Appellant(s) :- Mr. Uday Choudhary, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) :-
----
8/05.02.2025 Notices upon the respondent nos.1 and 2 have been received by
themselves and notices upon the respondent nos.3 and 4 have been received
by their father. Thus, notice upon them has been validly served. However, till
date, nobody has appeared on their behalf.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants in all these
appeals submits that all the cases are arising out of same judgment and award
passed by the learned Tribunal and the claimants have already received the
awarded amount and in view of that they are not appearing before this Court.
3. From the Office Note in all the cases suggest that the respondents
have been validly served, however, no appearance has been made on their
behalf.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants.
5. All these appeals have been preferred against the award dated
03.3.2020 passed in Motor Accident Claim Case No.90 of 2013 and analogous
cases whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.6,74,800/-;
Rs.7,00,000/-; Rs.6,94,000/- and Rs.7,42,000/- along with interest @ 7.5 % per
annum in Misc. Appeal No. 297 of 2020, Misc. Appeal No. 298 of 2020, Misc.
Appeal No. 299 of 2020 and Misc. Appeal No. 300 of 2020, respectively to the
claimants from the date of filing of the claim case within 30 days from the date
of award and it was further directed that the Insurance company shall have the
right to recover from the insured /owner after satisfying the liability/claim.
6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits
that Motor Accident Claim Case No.93 of 2013, 91 of 2013, 92 of 2013 and 93
of 2013 have been filed by the claimants for compensation arising out of same
accident and all the claim case has been decided by the learned court by one
award dated 03.03.2020 whereby the aforesaid award has been awarded in
favour of the claimants.
7. He submits that the said claim applications have been filed
alleging that on 7.2.2013 at about 11.45 a.m on Ghagra-Bishunpur Highway
near Adar Ghati Dhodra bridge a Truck loaded with passengers of 'Barat Party'
met with an accident wherein the 'Barat Party' were grievously injured and few
of the passengers died in the aforesaid accident. It is alleged that the residents
of Village Chundri (Nawatoli) from the house of Karmali Oraon villagers boarded
a Truck bearing registration No.JH-11B-7535 for marriage ceremony. It is
alleged that the driver of the Truck was drunken and was driving the vehicle in
rash and negligent manner as a result of which the above said accident took
place. The occurrence was informed to the Ghagra Police Station and pursuant
to that the F.I.R being Ghagra P.S. Case No.10 of 2013 dated 7.2.2013 was
registered under section 279, 337, 338 and 304A of the IPC. After investigation,
the charge sheet has been submitted against the driver namely Balkishun
Verma.
8. He submits that the appellant-company filed written statement in
the said claim case and denied the liability on the ground that the deceased
was travelling as gratuitous passenger along with other co-passengers in that
Truck and therefore, the owner of the aforesaid Truck has violated the terms
and condition of the insurance policy and in view of that the insurance company
is not liable. He submits that the learned court has framed the issues and
decided the said claim by the said order /judgment. He submits that the issue
no.4 was with regard to violation of the terms and conditions. He submits that
however the learned Tribunal has directed to first comply the award by the
insurance company and to recover the same and on this ground, he submits
that the appeals have been preferred.
9. The issue no.4 was framed on the point of violation of the terms
and conditions and the learned Tribunal has elaborately dealt with that issue
and considered all the aspects and has decided the issue in favour of the
appellants. However, in view of the several judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court, the direction has been issued to pay the same first by the insurance
company and recover the same from the owner. Thus, the right of recovery is
already there to the appellants. There is no illegality in the award.
10. It has been pointed that the award has already been satisfied in
favour of the claimants and inspite of valid service of notice, owner and driver
have chosen not to appear in the present appeals and the owner has also not
appeared before the learned Tribunal, that fact has been disclosed in the
supplementary affidavit filed in respective appeals.
11. In view of above, there is no illegality in the award and as such all
these appeals are dismissed.
12. In view of the above, the statutory amount deposited by the
appellants shall be released in favour of the insurance company on proper
application before the Registry as it was pointed out and stated in
supplementary affidavit that award has been satisfied.
13. Pending petition, if any, also stands disposed of accordingly.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
SI/,
