Sri Arindam Datta vs Sri Milan Deb
2021 Latest Caselaw 176 Tri

                                Page 1 of 4


                     HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                           AGARTALA

                            MAC APP No.102/2017

Sri Arindam Datta,
S/O Sri P.K. Datta, Resident of Abhoynagar, P.S. East Agartala, Agartala,
Tripura West.
(Owner of vehicle No. TR-01-A-2058 Commander Jeep)
                                                         .....Appellant(s)

                            Versus
1. Sri Milan Deb
   S/O Late Dhirendra Ch. Deb, Resident of Village- Gopal Nagar,
   P.S. Sidhai, District- West Tripura.

2. Sri Dulu Nandi,
   Son of Jitendra Nandi, resident of Shalbagan, near Shalbagan Bazar,
   Village- Hatipara, P.O. - Shalbagan, P.S. Airport,
   District - West Tripura.

3. The United India Insurance Com. Ltd.
   (Represented by the Divisional Manager), R.M.S. Chowmohani,
   Agartala, West Tripura, (Insurer of TR-01- A- 2058 Commander Jeep).

4. The National Insurance Company Ltd.
   Agartala Branch, 42, Akhaura Road, P.S. West Agartala,
   District - West Tripura. (Insurer of TR-01-4347 Commander Jeep).

                                                        .....Respondent(s)

For Appellant(s) : Ms. Sarama, Advocate.

For Respondent No.1. : Mr. Samarjit Bhattacharjee, Advocate.

For Respondent No.4. : Mr. Sandip Datta Choudhury, Advocate.

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI

Date of hearing and judgment : 12.02.2021.

Whether fit for reporting     : No.



                    JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)

This Appeal is filed by owner of one of the two vehicles involved in

the accident which took place more than 20 years back. On 03.09.1999, the

claimant was travelling in a commander jeep owned by the appellant

bearing registration No. TR-01-A-2058. The vehicle collided with another

jeep causing serious injuries to the claimant. Before the Claims Tribunal, it

appears that neither of the two vehicle owners defended themselves

properly. Claims Tribunal proceeded ex parte and passed the award

holding drivers of both the vehicles equally negligent in causing the

accident. The owners of both the vehicles were thus be responsible to

satisfy the decree in half. The appellant though claims that the vehicle was

duly insured at the time of the accident, did not produce any such

insurance policy before the Claims Tribunal. The record would further

suggest that only after the claimant filed Execution Petition in which

notice was issued to the appellant, he appeared before the Claims Tribunal

and requested the Tribunal to recall the award. Even after this attempt

failed, the appellant took no further steps to follow his remedies. It further

appears that when the claimant tried to execute the award against the

owner of the other vehicle, once again the present appellant tried to bring

on record certain facts. This attempt also failed and in fact, the application

at that stage was withdrawn. This Appeal was filed in the year 2017

against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, which was

passed on 16.01.2010. After the filing of this Appeal nearly 4 years later

also no attempt is made to bring any additional documents on record.

When so confronted, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that

previously the advocate engaged by the appellant did not defend him

properly. Though copy of the insurance policy was supplied to him he did

not produce it before the Tribunal. The appellant therefore changed his

advocate. Before this Court, the appellant would like to bring the insurance

policy on record.

2. The case presents a very sorry state of affairs. For the accident

which took place on 03.09.1999 in which the claimant received serious

bodily injuries, more than 20 years later he has so far not received any

compensation. This is more than 10 years after the Claims Tribunal passed

an award. Till date, the appellant has not produced the insurance policy

which covered his risk at the time of accident. Even this Appeal, which

was filed 7 years after the award has remain pending before the Court for

close to 4 years during which period also, no complete steps are taken by

the appellant to bring the insurance policy on record. The oral requests of

the counsel for the appellant that the appellant may be given an

opportunity to produce the insurance policy cannot be accepted.

3. Appeal is dismissed. Record may be transmitted to the Claims

Tribunal. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

(AKIL KURESHI), CJ

sima