Jharkhand High Court
Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd vs (I).Puja Dey on 11 November, 2025
Author: Gautam Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Gautam Kumar Choudhary
2025:JHHC:33814
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M. A. No.79 of 2022
Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., having its Police Issuing Office
at 4th Floor, Dhiren Tower, S.B. Shop Area Road, Bistupur, Town-
Jamshedpur, PO and PS- Bistupur, District- East Singhbhum (Jharkhand)
through its Legal Claims Head (East), Sri Jitendra Kumar Pandit, S/o Late
Rajendra Kumar Pandit, R/o 47A 1 /2 R. K. Ghoshal Road, PO and PS-
Kasba, District- Kolkata, PIN- 700042 (West Bengal).
.... .. ... Appellant(s)
Versus
1(i).Puja Dey, Widow of Late Mukund Kumar Dey
1(ii).Ankit Anand
1(iii).Gaurav Anand
Both S/o Late Mukund Kumar Dey
All R/o Shivajee Park, Chhoti Khanjarpur, Near S. M. College, PO-
Khanjarpur, District- Bhagalpur 812001.
2. M/s Triveni Engicons Private Limited (In Charge Anand Dorajaka), R/o St.
Near Shitla Mandir, Chakradharpur, PO and PS- Chakradharpur, District-
Singhbhum West.
3. Narayan Mahato, S/o Bardhanath Mahto, R/o Village- Sonua, PO and PS-
Sonua, District- Singhbhum West.
4.National Insurance Company Limited, Policy Issuing Office at Sadar
Bazar, Main Road, PO and PS- Sadar, Chaibasa, District- Singhbhum West.
.. ... ...Respondent(s)
...........
CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
.........
For the Appellant (s) : Mrs. Swati Shalini, Advocate
Mr. Amit Kr. Das, Advocate
For the Resp. No.4 : Mr. Pratiyush Kumar, Advocate
M/s Taru Gupta, Advocate
V. Chaturvedi, Advocate
For the Claimants : Mr. D. Kr. Maltiyar, Advocate
Mr. Ashok Kr. Pandey, Advocate
Mr. A. Gaurav, Advocate
For the Resp. No.2 : Mr. Krishanu Ray, Advocate
Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate
......
09/ 11.11.2025. Heard, learned counsel for the parties.
1. The appellant- Insurance Company is in appeal against the judgment and
Award of compensation dated 28.02.2022 passed by learned District
Judge-III-cum- P.O., Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West Singhbhum at
Chaibsa in Motor Accident Claims Case No.45 of 2018, whereby and
whereunder a compensation of Rs.13,66,302/- has been awarded along
with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim
application till date of payment and the liability has been fixed to pay the
compensation amount on the appellant- Insurance Company.
2. The finding of fact regarding the factum of accident and insurance of the
vehicle is not under-challenge in the instant Misc. Appeal.
2025:JHHC:33814
3. The main grounds of appeal are on two folds :- firstly it is contended that
the offending vehicle was a transport vehicle i.e. Pick-up Camper Bolero
used for commercial purpose and no permit was produced, therefore, it
amounted to breach of policy in terms of Section 149 (2) of the M. V. Act.
Secondly, it is argued that while awarding compensation, the medical Bills
have not been properly proved and compensation has been awarded
under the head of Loss of Marital bliss and Mental agony and Physical
pain also.
4. Learned counsel for the claimants has defended the impugned order/
judgment. It is argued, and rightly so, that hyper technical pleas of proof
are being raised in an accident claim case, which is essentially a beneficial
piece of legislation where rules of evidence do not apply in their absolute
rigidity.
5. For better appreciation of the award of compensation it is extracted below
:-
Srl. Heads Amount in Rupees
Number
1. Loss of earnings Not pleaded
2. Medical Bills Rs.11,56,302/-
3. Room Rent at Kolkata Rs.10,000/-
4. Ambulance & Train Fare Rs.50,000/-
5. Mental agony & Physical pain Rs.1,00,000/-
6. Loss of Marital bliss Rs.50,000/-
Total Rs.13,66,302/-
6. From the documents adduced into evidence on behalf of the claimants, it
is apparent that the deceased sustained motor vehicle accident involving
Pick Up van having Registration No.JH 06D - 5953 and as per Ext.1,
Sonua P.S. Case No.48 /2017 was registered.
7. The claimant/ injured was admitted after accident in Tata Main Hospital
as per Ext.4 and remained hospitalized for two months. He had sustained
head injury and was referred for treatment to Appollo Hospital, Kolkata
where his brain surgery was done. The documents regarding which have
been marked as Ext.5 to 5/26 and Ext. 6 to 6/17.
8. These documents leave no doubt regarding the nature of injury and
prolonged treatment.
9. So far as the plea of breach of terms of the insurance policy is concerned,
learned Tribunal has discussed at length in Para-38 of the impugned
judgment that the copy of the registration certificate of the offending
vehicle was adduced into evidence and marked as exhibit without any
objection. According to which, the net weight of the vehicle was 2735 Kg.
2025:JHHC:33814
for which a permit was not required in terms of Section 66(3)(1) of the M.
V. Act.
10. On these material evidence, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned
judgment of Award of compensation, as such, the instant Misc. Appeal
stands dismissed with cost. Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.
11. The statutory amount deposited at the time of preferring the
instant Misc. Appeal shall be remitted to the concerned Tribunal so
as to be disbursed/ adjusted in the final compensation amount.
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Uploaded
13.11.2025
Sandeep/
