Jharkhand High Court
The Branch Manager vs Mahendra Kumar Ram on 6 November, 2025
Author: Gautam Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Gautam Kumar Choudhary
2025:JHHC:33245
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M. A. No. 72 of 2025
The Branch Manager, Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, having its
Division office at 4th Floor, Dhiren Tower, S.B. Shop Area, Q. Road, Bistupur,
PO & PS- Bistupur, Town Jamshedpur-831001, District - East Singhbhum
(Jharkhand) and also through its Sr. Manager (Legal Claims) Sri. Abhinav Dutta,
aged about 28 years, son of Jhulan Dutta, residing at Thapar House, 4th Floor,
163, S.P. Mukherjee Road, PO & PS Tollygunj, District - Kolkata - 700026 (West
Bengal). .... .... Appellant
Versus
1. Mahendra Kumar Ram, S/o. Late Ram Karan Ram, R/o. at 186, Taira,
Asantaliya PO + PS- Chakradharpur, Dist-West Singhbhum, PIN 833105
(Jharkhand)
2. M/s. Sahu Enterprises, S/o. AkulaSahu, R/o. Telisai, Padampur, PO + PS +
District - Seraikela-Kharsawan, PIN 833101 (Jharkhand)
... .... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
For the Appellant : Mr. Amit Kr. Das, Advocate
Mrs. Swati Shalini, Advocate
Mr. Kanishka Deo, Advocate
For the Resp. No.1 : Mr. Aditya Banerjee, Advocate
For the Resp. No.2 : Mr. Rajesh Kr. Mishra, Advocate
------
Order No. 12 / Dated : 06.11.2025.
1. The Insurance Company is in appeal against the judgment and award of
compensation in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 128 of 2022 under Section
166 of the Motor Vehicle Act by which a compensation of Rs. 28,15,179/-has
been allowed with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing
of the claim application for permanent disability suffered by the claimant in
motor vehicle accident involving a truck bearing Registration No. JH05CW-
2647.
2. The factum of accident in which the claimant suffered 70% physical disability
is not in dispute.
3. The main ground to challenge the judgment and award is that the vehicle in
question was not having valid permit at the time of accident. The owner of the
vehicle had appeared before the learned Trial Court, but the permit was not
filed on his behalf to show that the vehicle was having valid permit at the time
of accident.
4. It is also contended that the learned Trial Court had referred to a driving
license of the driver, but the same has not been formally proved. It is also.
2025:JHHC:33245
argued that it was a case of contributory negligence but the truck has been held
to be responsible for the accident and the liability has been fixed on the
appellant-Insurance Company as insurer of the said truck.
5. The main plank of argument advanced on behalf of the Insurance Company is
that there was fundamental breach of the policy of insurance as neither the
driving licence nor the route permit adduced into evidence and proved as per
law.
6. Owner of the vehicle has entered into appearance and submits that he had
appeared before the learned Tribunal and also filed the route permit as well as
the driving licence and contested the claim by filing the written statement
stating therein specifically pleaded that the driver had a valid driving licence
and the vehicle was plying under a permit issued by the competent authority.
Both these documents were filed, but were not formerly proved, consequently,
the learned Tribunal did not take cognizance of it. Against this background,
I.A. No. 5083 of 2025 has been filed.
7. I.A. No. 13779 of 2025 has been filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC to
adduce into evidence. The valid route permit is annexed with the interlocutory
application.
8. Learned counsel on behalf of the Insurance Company raises an objection to
adducing the document into evidence at the appellate stage.
9. Considering the grounds taken, I.A. No. 13779 of 2025 is allowed and the
photocopy of the route permit issued by the Government of Jharkhand valid
from 31.12.2020 to 30.12.2025 is marked as Ext. P-11.
10.Accident took place on 13.05.2021 and from these documents, it is evident
that the offending vehicle bearing registration no. JH05CW-2647 was having
a valid route permit at the time of accident. With regard to the driving licence
from perusal of the judgment, it is evident that driving licence No.
JH0620080156158 of driver-Rasika Tiu was produced which was valid from
08.07.2021 to 08.07.2023 and therefore, the driver was having a valid driving
licence at the time of accident.
11. No contrary evidence has been led on behalf of the Insurance Company to
controvert these evidences.
12. In this view of the matter, I do not find it to be a case of fundamental breach
of terms of insurance policy under Section 149 sub-Section 2 of the Motor
Vehicle Act, 1988.
2025:JHHC:33245
13.This Miscellaneous Appeal accordingly stands dismissed and pending I.A., if
any stands disposed of.
14.Statutory amount deposited at the time of preferring the instant Misc. Appeal
be remitted to the Tribunal for disbursement to the claimant against final
compensation awarded in his favour within a month of this order.
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Pawan/ -
Uploaded
10.11.2025
