Jharkhand High Court
M/S Oriental Insurance Company Ltd vs Masomat Yashoda on 9 September, 2025
Author: Gautam Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Gautam Kumar Choudhary
2025:JHHC:27578
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M. A. No. 239 of 2013
M/s Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Divisional Office at P.O. + P.S. Lalpur,
District-Ranchi through its Senior Divisional Manager, D.O.-I, Town and
District-Ranchi Sri Alok Kumar Singh, S/o Sri Suresh Kumar Singh, R/o Tiwari
Enclave, Circular Road P.O. -Lalpur, P.S.-Lalpur, District-Ranchi
.... .... Appellant
Versus
1. Masomat Yashoda, W/o Late Kameshwar Rai
2. Ramdeo Kumar Rai, S/o Late Kameshwar Rai
Both residents of Keyitand, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Dhanwar, District-Giridih
3. Umesh Kumar Rai @ Umesh Prasad Rai, S/o Dharmani Rai, R/o Village-
Bandhi, P.O. & P.S. Dhanwar, District-Giridih, Owner and driver of the
vehicle (Mahendra Sawari No. JH-12A-6430).
4. Sri Shyamdeo Singh, R/o Kalyan Nagar, Road No. 1, Hume Pipe Sakchi, P.O.
& P.S. Sakchi, District-Singhbhum East Jamshedpur, Owner of Ashok
Leyland Truck No. HR-38 D - 7766
5. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Bistupur Branch, P.S.-Bistupur, P.O.
Jamshedpur, Jharkhand, Insurer of Ashok Leyland Truck No. HR-38 D -
7766, vide insurance policy no. 541001/31/04/0/967 w.e.f. 14.10.04 to
13.10.05
6. Driver of the Truck No. JH 38 D 7766 is not known.
... .... Respondents
With
M. A. No. 358 of 2013
Umesh Kumar Roy @ Rai @ Umesh Prasad Roy @ Rai, S/o Dharmani Roy
@ Rai, R/o Village- Bandhi, P.O.- Khorimahua P.S. Raj Dhanwar, District-
Giridih, Owner-cum-Driver of Mahendra Sawari Vehicle No. JH-12A-6430.
.... .... Appellant
Versus
1. Masomat Yashoda, W/o Late Kameshwar Rai
2. Ramdeo Kumar Rai, S/o Late Kameshwar Rai
Both residents of Keyatand, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Dhanwar, District-Giridih
3. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Registered Office Oriental House,
A-25/27, Asraf Ali Road, New Delhi-110002, having been insured by the
Oriental Insurance Company Limited, at Ranchi Branch, Ved Narayan
Bhawan, Katchary Road, P.S.-Lalpur, P.O. & District-Ranchi, represented
through the Oriental Insurance Company, Divisional Office at B, 24 City
Center, Sector-IV P.S. Sector-IV, P.O. & District-Bokaro Steel City, Jharkhand
(Insurer of the Mahindra Savari Vehicle No. JH 12A 6430)
4. Sri Shyamdeo Singh, S/o Prayag Singh, R/o Kalyan Nagar, Road No. 1, Hume
Pipe, P.O. & P.S. Sakchi, District-Singhbhum East, Jamshedpur (Owner of
Ashok Leyland Truck No. HR-38 D 7766).
5. M/s New India Assurance Co. Ltd., registered office 87 Mahatma Gandhi
Road Port Mumbai at Mumbai having been insured by its Bistupur Branch,
P.O. & P.S.-Bistupur, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand and represented through the
local Branch, The Branch Manager, The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
Giridih Branch, P.O., P.S. & District-Giridih (Insurer of Truck No. HR-38 D
7766)
6. Driver of the Truck No. JH 38 D 7766 is not known.
2025:JHHC:27578
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
M.A. No.239/13
For the Appellant : Mr. Prashant Vidyarthy, Advocate
For the Respondent No.3 : Mr. Mr. Shailendra Jit, Advocate
For the Respondent No.5 : Mr. G.C. Jha, Advocate
M.A. No.358/13
For the Appellant : Mr. V.K. Tiwary, Advocate
Mr. Shailendra Jit, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Prashant Vidyarthi, Advocate
Mr. Pratyush Kumar
For the Resp. No. 5 : Mr. G.C. Jha, Advocate
------
Order No. 16 / Dated : 09.09.2025.
1. Both these appeals arise out of the common judgment and award of
compensation in Claim Case No. 33/2007, whereby and whereunder a
compensation has been awarded under Section 166 of the M.V. Act for the
death of Kameshwar Rai in a motor vehicle accident while he was travelling
in Mahendra Sawari vehicle bearing registration no. JH-12A-6430.
2. M.A. No. 358 of 2013 has been preferred by the owner-cum-driver of
Mahendra Sawari vehicle bearing registration no. JH-12A-6430 and is
aggrieved by order by which right to recovery has been granted to the
Insurance-Company against the appellant (owner of the vehicle). M.A. No.
239 of 2013 has been filed by the Oriental Insurance Company, the insurer of
the Mahendra Sawari vehicle bearing registration no. JH-12A-6430 against
the finding of composite negligence and liability being fixed to the extent of
50% on it. Since the issue involved in both these appeals are interrelated,
therefore, these appeals will be heard together and disposed of by the common
order.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel, Mr. Vishal Kr. Tiwary, appearing on
behalf of the appellant in M.A. No. 358 of 2013 that the more than 6-7 persons
died and separate claim cases were filed in all of which the right to recovery
was granted.
4. This Court in M.A. No. 201 of 2010 along with M.A. No. 212 of 2010 and
M.A. No. 09 of 2011 held that the accident took place due to rash and negligent
driving by the Mahendra Sawari vehicle bearing registration no. JH-12A-6430
and thereby absolved the owner and its insurer of the truck from any liability.
2025:JHHC:27578
It was also held that the there was no breach of terms and conditions of the
insurance policy by the owner of the offending vehicle, and consequently the
order of pay and recover from the owner of the vehicle was set aside.
5. This is a case with the only difference that claim of the deceased husband has
been allowed in favour Masomat Yashoda namely Kameshwar Rai and the
liability was fixed on the Insurance-Company with a right to recovery in
favour of the Insurance-Company against the owner. M.A. No. 239 of 2013
has been preferred by the insurer of the Mahendra Sawari vehicle bearing
registration no. JH-12A-6430 by which 50% liability has been fixed on it as
composite negligence.
6. Heard both sides.
7. The point for determination is basically with regard to the following questions
in the present appeal:
I. Whether it was a case of composite negligence caused by the driver of
the truck bearing registration no. HR 38D 7766 and the driver of
Mahendra Sawari vehicle bearing registration no. JH-12A-6430?
II. Whether the right to recovery allowed in favour of both the Insurance-
Company against the owner of both the vehicles are sustainable or not?
8. As discussed above these questions have already been answered in M.A. No.
201 of 2010 and its analogous cases, and that there is no other question of fact
or law involved in the present appeals as distinguishable from the earlier
appeals. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the findings rendered in
the earlier case are reiterated with respect to the above points for determination
and is, accordingly, answered as below.
I. The accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the
Mahendra Sawari vehicle bearing registration no. JH-12A-6430 by
its driver Umesh Kumar Rai @ Umesh Prasad Rai, the said vehicle
was under insurance cover of the Oriental Insurance Company at
the relevant time of accident. The finding of the Tribunal of
composite negligence is, therefore, not sustainable and is,
accordingly, set aside.
II. Further, a finding so far as right to recovery has been awarded to
the Insurance-Company against the owner of the vehicle being
Umesh Kumar Rai @ Umesh Prasad Rai is also not sustainable and
set aside.
2025:JHHC:27578
9. In view of the above findings, M.A. No. 358 of 2013 is allowed and M.A.
No. 239 of 2013 stands dismissed.
Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.
Statutory amount deposited at the time of preferring in both the Misc.
Appeals be returned to the concerned appellants.
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Pawan/
