Tripura High Court
Smt. Rekha Nama And Ors vs Sri Sudhir Karmakar And Anr on 5 July, 2024
Author: T. Amarnath Goud
Bench: T. Amarnath Goud
Page 1 of 5
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
MFA(EC) NO.5 OF 2023
Smt. Rekha Nama and ors. ......Appellant(s)
Versus
Sri Sudhir Karmakar and anr.
.......Respondent(s)
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. T. Chakraborty, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S.D. Choudhury, Advocate.
Mr. D. Kalai, Advocate.
Mr. S. Noatia, Advocate.
Date of hearing and delivery of
Judgment & Order : 05.07.2024
Whether fit for reporting : YES/NO.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD
J U D G M E N T & O R D E R(ORAL)
This present appeal is filed against the Judgment and
nil award dated 23.08.2023, passed by the learned
Commissioner, Employe's Compensation West Tripura, Agartala
in Case No.T.S.(E.C)08 of 2017.
2. The brief of this case is that the one Dilip Nama i.e.,
husband of the appellant No.1 herein was performing his duty as
a driver under respondent No.1. The said Dilip Nama with one
assistant/helper while proceeding from Agartala for Gauhati
driving the truck bearing No.AS-01-R-2783 became missing. In
connection with the missing of the said Dilip Nama, his wife i.e.,
appellant No.1 herein lodged a missing information of her
husband to the Amtali Police State which was registered as
Amtali P.S. G.D. entry No.611 dated 15.04.2008. The owner of
the said vehicle i.e. respondent No.1 herein also lodged another
FIR which was registered at East Agartala Police Station vide East
Agartala P.S. Case No.140 of 2008 and police after investigation
filed chargesheet wherein it was mentioned that the vehicle was
stolen. The said case was registered as G.R.729 OF 2008.
Subsequently, the claimant-appellants registered a case bearing
No. T.S.(EC)08 of 2017 before the Commissioner of Employee's
Compensation, West Tripura Agartala claiming compensation.
The respondents also contested the case by submitting their
respective written statements. After the Trial, the learned
Reference Judge passed the Judgment with nil award dated
23.08.2023.
3. The appellant herein by filing this present appeal has
prayed to set aside the impugned Judgment and Award dated
23.08.2023.
4. Heard Mr. T. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing
for the appellants as well as Mr. S.D. Choudhury, learned counsel
appearing for respondent No.2 Mr. D. Kalai, learned counsel, and
Mr. S. Noatia, learned counsel for respondent No.1.
5. Mr. T. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the
appellants submit that both the owner of the vehicle and
appellant No.1 had filed FIR but police admitted the FIR of the
owner of the vehicle but did not admit the FIR of the appellant
No.1. The police thereafter filed their chargesheet wherein it was
mentioned that the vehicle was stolen away and showed the said
Dilip Nama as absconder. Learned counsel submits that police is
unable to find the vehicle nor the driver of the the vehicle.
Learned counsel further submits that the Court below failed to
appreciate that the person has been missing for the last 15 years
and as per law it can easily be presumed that he is dead. Stating
thus learned counsel urged this Court to allow this appeal.
6. On the other hand, Mr. S.D. Choudhury, learned
counsel appearing for respondent No.2 submits that at the point
of the incident, the State of Tripura was suffering from extremist
related incident and there is a memorandum dated 7th January
2000 issued by the State Government to deal with person
missing or abducted in such cases. Further learned counsel
submits that the final report of the police suggests that the
vehicle was stolen and the person in question is absconding.
7. Heard and perused the evidence on record.
8. It is seen from the record that admittedly in the year
2008, the husband of the complainant-appellant had gone
missing and way back on 7th January 2000, the Government of
Tripura had issued a memorandum vide No.F1(1)-GA(P&T0/97(P)
with regard to person missing after abduction by extremist. Even
if the version of the owner-respondent is to be believed that the
husband of the complainant-appellant has gone absconding, the
same is not supported by way of any oral or documentary
evidence.
9. In view of the same, the impugned Judgment and
Order dated 23.08.2023 is set aside and the matter is remanded
back to the learned Commissioner of Employee's Compensation
to ascertain the police investigation report and also the final
report in pursuance of the complaint made by the appellant-wife.
The learned Court below has to also ascertain the evidence of the
concerned police officer and thereafter pass a reasoned order
within 6(six) months preferably on or before 31st December
2024. Both sides be given reasonable liberty to meet the ends of
justice.
10. With the above observation and direction, this present
appeal stands disposed of. Stay if any stands vacated. Pending
application(s), if any also stands closed.
JUDGE
suhanjit
RAJKUMAR Digitally signed by
RAJKUMAR SUHANJIT
SUHANJIT SINGHA
Date: 2024.07.10
SINGHA 15:05:54 +05'30'
