Tripura High Court
National Insurance Company Limited vs Sri Ranjit Banik And 2 Others on 20 June, 2024
Author: T. Amarnath Goud
Bench: T. Amarnath Goud
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A
MAC. App. No.53 of 2023
1. National Insurance Company Limited.
..... Appellant
-V E R S U S-
1. Sri Ranjit Banik and 2 Others.
.....Respondents.
B_E_F_O_R_E
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD
For Appellant(s) : Mr. N. Debnath, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Lodh, Advocate.
Whether fit for reporting : YES/NO
Judgment and order dated 20th June, 2024
JUDGMENT & ORDER [ORAL]
Heard Mr. N. Debnath, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant also heard Mr. S. Lodh, learned counsel appearing for the
respondents.
[2] This is an appeal filed under Section-173 of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988 as amended till date, against the award dated 06.02.2023 passed by
the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court No.4 West
Tripura, Agartala in connection with T.S. (MAC) 44 of 2020 whereby the
appellant National Insurance Co. Ltd has directed to pay an awarded amount of
Rs.23,60,400/- with 9% interest from 11.03.2020 till payment is made.
[3] The appellant has prayed for the following reliefs:
a. Admit the appeal.
b. Call for the records of case No. T.S.(MAC) 44 of 2020 from the learned
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Court No.4, West Tripura, Agartala.
c. Stay the operation of the impugned award dated 06.02.2023 passed in
T.S. (MAC) 44 of 2020.
d. After hearing the parties be kind enough to set aside/quash the
impugned award appealed against."
[4] As per the impugned judgment, the brief fact of the case is that on
20.01.2019 the claimant met with an accident involving the offending truck
bearing registration No.TR-01-AA-1841, which dashed him coming from back
side in a rash and negligent manner. The claimant was immediate taken to
hospital and later on discharged after operating his right leg. On 11.03.2020 suit
was instituted by the claimant. Thereafter, issues were framed. The the National
Insurance contested the claim by filing written objection. After recording the
evidence, the learned Court below without appreciating the vital arguments put
forwarded by the O.P. and overlooking the lacunas in the case of the claimant,
the learned tribunal passed the impugned judgment and award directing the OP
to pay the compensation to the claimants. The learned tribunal without
appreciating the settled law of the land and appreciation of facts committed
serious error inviting failure of justice for the appellant herein.
[5] The learned Tribunal after hearing the parties and on perusal of
the material evidence on record has observed as under:
"In the result, the application under Section-166 of the M.V. Act, 199 filed
by the claimant, Sri Ranjit Banik is allowed on contest.
The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.23,60,400/- (Rupees twenty three
lakhs sixty thousand and four hundred) only as compensation in this case.
O.P. No.3 the National Insurance Co. Ltd. being insurer of the offending
vehicle bearing No. TR-01-AA-1841 shall pay the said amount of
compensation to the claimant within a period of 30(thirty) days from the
date of award in terms of Section-168(3) of the Act.
The amount of compensation shall carry interest @9% per annum from the
date of presentation of claim petition before the tribunal on 11.03.2020 till
realization.
40% of the share of the claimant petitioner be invested by purchasing fixed
deposit certificate from any Nationalized Bank at least for the next 5 years
with a liberty to the claimant petitioner to withdraw the monthly interest
from his own account and no loan or advance or pre-mature withdrawal
shall be allowed without prior sanction of this tribunal.
The O.P. insurance company shall give notice of the deposit of the
compensation amount to the claimant and shall also file a compliance
report with this Tribunal within 15 days of the deposit."
[6] Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and award
06.02.2023 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Court No.4 West Tripura, Agartala in connection with T.S. (MAC) 44 of 2020,
the present appeal has been preferred by the appellant.
[7] From the claim statement supported by the evidence of PW-1
it appears that monthly income of the claimant was Rs.16,000/- at the
time of accident. Though there is no document submitted to prove such
contention, but it can be easily presumed that in the year 2019 a
businessman could have earn at least Rs.14,000/- at the time of accident.
Accordingly, monthly income of the claimant is considered as
Rs.14,000/- at the time of accident. In the present case the disablement
has been shown as temporary, but it must be treated as permanent in view
of the settled principle of law.
[8] In view of overall analysis made by the learned tribunal and
after going through the material evidence in its entirety, this Court is of
the view that the assessment of compensation as awarded by the learned
tribunal below is just and proper and needs no interference thus, the
findings as arrived at by the learned tribunal below stands affirmed.
Consequently, the present appeal stands dismissed. As a sequel,
miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Draw the
decree accordingly and thereafter, send down the LCRs forthwith.
T. Amarnath Goud, J
A.Ghosh
ANJAN Digitally signed by
ANJAN GHOSH
GHOSH Date: 2024.07.01
15:53:05 +05'30'
