The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Mst. Rahimun Nessa
2022 Latest Caselaw 278 Tri

                                                   Page 1 of 8



                 HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                        AGARTALA
                 MAC. APP. NO.12 OF 2022

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
Represented by its Divisional Manager,
Agartala Divisional Office, Central Road,
P.S. West Agartala, District- West Tripura.
(Insurer of Vehicle No.TR.02-B-3496(Auto Rickshaw)

                             ---- Appellant-petitioner

                          Versus
1. Mst. Rahimun Nessa,
Wife of Late Tayab Ali
Village-Bhagabnagar,
P.O & P.S.- Kailashahar,
Sub-Division- Kailashahar,
Dist- Unakoti, Tripura.

2. Mst. Rukia Begam,
D/o Lt. Tayab Ali,
W/o. Abdul Highe Ali.

3. Mst. Ambia Begam,
D/o- Lt. Tayab Ali,
W/o- Habibur Rahaman,

4. Mst. Sufia Begum(Dead)
D/o. Lt. Tayab Ali,
W/o- Matiur Rahaman,

5(a) Mst. Rehana Aktar,

5(b) Mst. Forhana Begum,

5(c) Mst. Sahina Aktar,

5(a,b,c) are daughters of Matiur Rahaman and deceased
Sufia Begam, all are villagers of- Bhaganbannagar, P.O.
Gournagar, P.S. Kailashahar, Unakoti District.

                             ---- Claimant-Respondents

6. Md. Mukit Ali, S/o- Siddek Ali, Village- Rangauti, P.O. Rangauti, P.S. Irani, District-Unakoti, (Driver and owner of the offending vehicle bearing No. TR.02-B-3496)

------- Owner-Respondent

For the Appellant(s) : Mr. P. Gautam, Advocate.

For the Respondent(s)             : None
Date of hearing                   : 04.03.2022.

Date of delivery of
Judgment & Order                  : 08/03/2022.

Whether fit for reporting         : YES.


        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD
                    JUDGMENT & ORDER

This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, read with Section 168 of the Act

ibid, against the impugned judgment and award dated

10.06.2020 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,

Unakoti Judicial District Kailashahar, in Case No. T.S.(MAC)

No.08 of 2019.

2. The brief facts are that, on 23.12.2015, at about

7.00 hours, the deceased-Tayab Ali proceeded from his

residence to Kailashahar town boarding on the offending

vehicle (Auto-rickshaw) bearing registration No. TR.02-B-

3496. When the said vehicle reached near Kubjar, the said

auto rickshaw capsized due to the rash and negligent

driving of the driver. As a result of said accident, Tayab Ali

sustained severe injuries, and immediately he was shifted

to RGM Hospital where he succumbed to his injuries.

3. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., which is a

Government of India undertaking was impleaded as the

insurer of the vehicle bearing registration No.TR-02-B-3496

(Auto Rickshaw) in the claim petition filed by the claimant-

respondents under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act,

1988, in the case No.T.S. (MAC) No. 08 of 2019 claiming

compensation of Rs.32,40,000/- for the death of Tayab Ali

in the above-mentioned accident occurred on 23.12.2015 at

about 7.00 hours.

4. The owner-respondent i.e. the O.P. No. 2 of the

vehicle bearing No.TR-02-B-3496 though appeared but

failed to submit written statement and by order dated

31.05.2019, the owner was barred from filing written

statement.

5. The appellant-Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

appeared and contested the case by filing written statement

denying and disputing the averments made in the claim

petition stating that the claimant-petitioners in that T.S.

(MAC) No.8 of 2019 are not entitled to any compensation

claimed by the claimants. The appellant insurance Company

also denied the profession and monthly income on the date

and time of the accident. The appellant-insurance company

also denied the accident and injuries sustained by the

deceased-Tayab Ali. Finally, the appellant-insurance

company denied the involvement of the vehicle bearing

registration No.TR-02-B-3496(Auto Rickshaw) with the

alleged accident.

6. The learned Tribunal fastened the entire liability of

the compensation of Rs.10,59,594/- against the appellant-

insurance Company along with 8% interest per annum from

the date of filing of the claim petition and directed the

appellant-insurance company to satisfy the awarded

amount within 30 days from the date of judgment and

award.

7. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid

impugned judgment and award dated 10.06.2020, passed

by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Unakoti District,

Kailashahar in Case No.T.S. (MAC) 08 of 2019, the

appellant-Oriental Insurance Company preferred the instant

appeal and prayed for the following reliefs:-

"a) Admit the appeal

b) Call for the case records from the learned Tribunal below;

c) Stay the operation of the impugned judgment and award dated 10.06.2020 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Unakoti Judicial District, Kailashahar in Case No.T.S.(MAC) o8 of 2019 and the Hon'ble High Court may kindly be pleased to direct the learned Tribunal not to proeed with the execution proceeding if any filed by the claimant respondents in the mean time till disposal of the present appeal.

d) After hearing the parties be pleased enough to set aside/quash the impugned judgment and award dated 10.06.2020 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Unakoti Judicial District, Kailashahar in Case No.T.S. (MAC) No.08 of 2019."

8. Heard Mr. P. Gautam, learned counsel appearing

for the appellant-Oriental Insurance Company. None

appears for the respondents.

9. Mr. Gautam, learned counsel appearing for the

appellant submitted that the learned Tribunal most illegally

and in an arbitrary and mechanical manner by his own

whims and fancies fastened the entire liability of the

compensation upon the appellant insurance company which

does not stand in law and is liable to be interfered by the

Hon'ble High Court for ends of justice and to protect the

unnecessary drainage of public exchequer.

10. Mr. Gautam, learned counsel further advanced his

argument on the point of non-filing of proof of service as

well as the pension document of the deceased as the same

were not before the learned Tribunal. However, the learned

Tribunal considered the submission of the P.W.-1 and fixed

the notional amount of pension at Rs.14,438/- per month

which the appellant-insurance company disputes.

11. Considered the arguments of learned counsel as

well as perused the evidence on record and the judgment

passed by the learned Tribunal.

12. The Apex Court time and again in many cases have

fixed notional amount award at Rs.10,000/-and even above

in the absence of proof of income. In the context of the

present case, I may refer to the Apex Court judgment of

Kurvan Ansari alias Kurvan Ali & anr., vs. Shyam

Kishore Murmu & Anr., bearing registration No. Civil

Appeal No.6902 of 2021, wherein, the Apex Court has

fixed Rs.25,000/- as the notional income. So, fixing notional

income at Rs.10,000/- or above in this instant matter is

just and proper.

13. Motor Accident Claim Appeal is a beneficial

legislation. In the present matter, the deceased person

happens to be a retired Government employee and the

same contention has not been negated by the learned

counsel appearing for the insurance company before the

learned Tribunal. It is also not disputed that the deceased

person has been survived with his widow and his children.

So, the deceased used to maintain himself and the above

family members. So, in the above scenario, it cannot be

said that the deceased person should be having income not

less than the amount that has been fixed by the learned

Tribunal towards his monthly income i.e. Rs.14,438/-.

14. Hence, this Court is not inclined to interfere with

the order passed by the learned Tribunal as the same is just

and proper.

15. Accordingly, this instant appeal stands dismissed

and thus disposed of. As a sequel, miscellaneous

applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

JUDGE

suhanjit