Sunday, 17, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

The Divisional Manager vs Pushpa Kumari
2025 Latest Caselaw 7016 Jhar

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 7016 Jhar
Judgement Date : 19 November, 2025

Jharkhand High Court

The Divisional Manager vs Pushpa Kumari on 19 November, 2025

Author: Gautam Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Gautam Kumar Choudhary
                                                                  2025:JHHC:34558




IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                       Misc. Appeal No.446 of 2025
                                          ------

The Divisional Manager, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, through its Manager Legal, Amit Jaiswal, son of Shri M. Bhagat, having its Branch at Kadru Bye Pass Road, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi .... .... .... Appellant Versus

1. Pushpa Kumari, wife of Late Niranjan Kumar

2. Aryan Kumar, son of Late Niranjan Kumar

3. Sajal Anjali, daughter of Late Niranjan Kumar Sl. Nos.2 and 3 are minors and they are represented through their natural guardian as well as the mother namely Pushpa Kumari

4. Suraj Mani Devi, wife of Late Chhote Narayan Singh All residents of Sector 3/D, Qr. No.435, B.S. City, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro

5. Govind Kumar Turi, resident of Basanti More, Cooling Point No.2, Baidhmara, P.O. Harla, P.S. Harla, District Bokaro

6. The Divisional Manager, ICICI Lombard Motor Insurance Company Limited, Branch address- First Floor, Plot No. M-5, City Centre, Sector IV, B.S. City, Bokaro .... .... .... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

For the Appellant : Mr. Bibhash Sinha, Advocate For the Respondents :

------

Order No.02 / Dated : 19.11.2025 Insurance Company is in appeal against the judgment of award of compensation passed by District Judge I-cum-MACT, Bokaro in Motor Accident Claim Case No.107 of 2021 whereby and whereunder compensation has been awarded under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act to the claimants for which liability has been fixed on the Insurance Company to pay compensation amount with a right to recovery.

2. It is argued by the learned counsel on behalf of the Insurance Company that in effect the claimant did not suffer any financial loss as opposite party no.1- Pushpa Kumari, the widow of the deceased was given compassionate appointment by Steel Authority of India Limited on the death of her husband, Niranjan Kumar, who was employed in Bokaro General Hospital, Bokaro. Reliance is placed on Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.9515 of 2020 (New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Sunita Sharma & Others), wherein it has been held that the High Court had deducted only 50% of the compensation under Deceased Government Employment Rules,

2025:JHHC:34558

2006 of the Government of Haryana. It is further argued that the factum of accident is also under cloud as there was no DTO report.

3. Having considered the submissions, the main point for determination in the instant appeal is whether compassionate appointment to Claimant No.1, can be ground for disallowing the claim case or reducing the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal.

4. On perusal of the authority relied upon, it is manifest that the direction of the Apex Court was confined to deduction of 50% of the compensation under Deceased Government Employment Rules, 2006 as framed by the Government of Haryana. No such Rule is here that mandates deduction of any compensation amount on account of compassionate appointment being granted by the employer-Company.

5. Law in this regard has been held by Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 13668-13669 of 2024 (Balwinder Kaur Vs. Punjab State through its Secretary & Anr.) that the offering of compassionate appointment to a family member of the deceased cannot be a ground to dislodge a claim for death under the Motor Vehicle Act. In nutshell, it has been held that both are different reliefs and availability of one cannot be a ground for denial of another.

6. Further, I do not find any force in the argument advanced that accident has not been proved. The FIR, charge sheet and direct evidence prove that the death was accidental in nature.

Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. Interlocutory Application, if any, is disposed of.

Insurance Company is directed to pay the balance compensation amount to the claimants within a month of the order. Statutory amount be remitted to the Tribunal for payment.

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Anit

Uploaded 21.11.2025

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter