Sangita Devi vs Ganesh Yadav
2026 Latest Caselaw 2941 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Sangita Devi vs Ganesh Yadav on 10 April, 2026

                                                           ( 2026:JHHC:10372 )


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                              M.A. No. 8 of 2024
1.      Sangita Devi, wife of late Krishnadev Prasad Yadav @ Krishna Yadav
        age about 27 years,
2.      Jyoti Kumari, daughter of Late Krishnadev Prasad Yadav @ Krishna
        Yadav age about 6 years is minor represented by Mother appellant no 1,
        both R/O Village- Goniya, P.O- Bahsa Pipra. P.S.-Fatehpur, District-
        Gaya (Bihar).
                                               ..... ..... Appellants
                                   Versus
  1.     Ganesh Yadav, S/o Muni Yadav, R/o Village Amatary Ρ.Ο. Amatary
         & P.S.- Mohanpur, Dist- Gaya State-Bihar.
  2.     Branch Manager, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., P.O. & P.S.
         -Bank More, Katras Road, District - Dhanbad, State- Jharkhand.
         Issuing Office;- 06th Floor, Mani Sqaure, 06th Floor Mani Sqaure, 164
         Canal Circle Road, Mani Square Premises, P.O & P.S. Canal Circle,
         Dist.- Kolkata, West Bengal. (Insurer of Supro Maxi Truck/ Tata Ace
         Tempo No-WB-03D/5404).
                                               .... .... Respondents
                            ------

CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

------

For the Appellants : Mr Gaurav Kumar, Advocate For the Resp. No. 1 : Mr Nilesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate Mr Ankur Anand, Advocate For the Resp. No. 2 : Mr Alok Lal, Advocate

-----

7 /Dated: 10.04.2026

1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the parties referred to the settlement agreement

dated 26.03.2026 arrived at between the parties in the mediation proceedings

held by the Jharkhand State Legal Services Authority.

3. In terms of the settlement agreement, the 2nd respondent-Insurance

Company had agreed to pay the appellants a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- towards

full and final settlement of their claim over and above the amount already

paid to her earlier.

4. Mr. Alok Lal, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent states that the

appellants had earlier been paid rupees eighteen lacs and by now settlement,

they are being paid a further amount of rupees four lacs. He further states that

( 2026:JHHC:10372 )

the amount of rupees four lacs is already deposited by the Insurance

Company before the MACT, Dhanbad.

5. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of by directing the 2nd respondent-

Insurance Company to comply with the terms of the settlement agreement.

6. Accordingly, the appellants are directed to withdraw this amount and

the Registrar of the MACT must facilitate such withdrawal by directly

transferring this amount into the 1st appellant, i.e. Sangita Devi's Bank

account. Learned counsel for the appellants states that Bank and identity

details will be supplied to the registry of the Civil Court where the amount is

deposited immediately.

7. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms without any order for cost.

(M.S. Sonak, C.J.)

April 10, 2026 Ranjeet / R.Kr.

NAFR Uploaded on 10.04.2026