The Divisional Manager vs Linda Orain
2025 Latest Caselaw 1766 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

The Divisional Manager vs Linda Orain on 16 January, 2025

Author: Gautam Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Gautam Kumar Choudhary

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                     M. A. No. 95 of 2015
                          -----

The Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Lalji Hirji Road, P.O-GPO Ranchi, P.S.-Kotwali, Ranchi ... .... Appellant Versus

1. Linda Orain, W/o Late Bhutia Linda

2. Sukra Linda, S/o Late Bhutia Linda

3. Suman Linda, D/o Late Bhutia Linda, All R/o Village-Satranji, P.O.Hulhundi, P.S.-Hatia, Dist.-Ranchi

4. Suresh Toppo, S/o P. Toppo, R/o Kolebira, P.O & P.S.-Kolebira, Dist.-Simdega, Jharkhand ... .... Respondents

-----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

-----

For the Appellant : Mr. Mukesh Kr. Dubey, Advocate For Respondents 1-3: M/s Saumya Pandey & Nikhil Ranjan, Advocates

-----

Oral Order 25 / Dated : 16.01.2025

1. The insurance company is in appeal before this Court against the award of compensation of Rs. 4,80,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% from the date of the order, under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, wherein Compensation Case No. 73 of 2002 by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Tribunal, Ranchi.

2. The appeal has been preferred mainly on the ground that the vehicle i.e. Ambassador Car being Registration No. BHT 5389 was not under insurance cover at the relevant time of accident on 27.01.2002.

3. It is submitted that the vehicle was initially insured on 22.01.2002 and its insurance was cancelled on 23.01.2002 vide the letter of cancellation of cover note (Ext.A). In view of the cancellation of the insurance at the time of accident that the said vehicle was not under insurance cover.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent has defended the impugned judgment and submits that the specific reason has been assigned for not accepting the plea that the vehicle was not under insurance of the appellant at the time of accident.

5. On perusal of the impugned order, it is apparent that the

original cover note by which the insurance policy was said to be cancelled, was not produced. The financer of the vehicle had assured for insurance, and the premium was also paid and accepted but the insurance was refused on technical ground that the vehicle of 1974 make was not allowed to be insured. However, no such circular was produced before the Tribunal. It was for the reasons that learned Tribunal rejected the plea of the Insurance Company that it was not insured at the relevant time of the accident.

Under the circumstance, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. The judgment is affirmed and the misc. appeal stands dismissed.

The statutory amount has already been withdrawn by learned counsel for the appellant.

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) AKT/Satendra