Tripura High Court
Cholamandalam Ms. General Insurance ... vs . on 4 August, 2025
Author: T. Amarnath Goud
Bench: T. Amarnath Goud
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
MAC. APP. NO.8 OF 2025
Cholamandalam MS. General Insurance Company ltd.
Vs.
Smt. Sujita Rupini(Marak) and ors.
HON'BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD
Present:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. R. Saha, Advocate.
Ms. R. Purukayastha, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Majumder, Advocate.
Mr. P. Rathor, Advocate.
Mr. T. Debbarma, Advocate.
Mr. S. Debbarma, Advocate.
Mr. D. Debbarma, Advocate.
04.08.2025
Order
1. This present appeal has been filed under Section 173
of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, read with Section 168 of the said Act, by
the appellant insurance company, challenging the Judgment and Award
dated 10.06.2024, passed by the Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Court No. 2, Dhalai Judicial District, Ambassa, Tripura, in Case No. T.S.
(MAC) 12 of 2021.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the claimant-
respondents instituted a claim petition under the Motor Vehicles Act before
the Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court No. 2, Dhalai Judicial
District, Ambassa, Tripura, alleging that on 16.03.2020, Albin Marak met
with a road traffic accident and died as a result. The claimants appeared and
contested the case. After a full-fledged trial and hearing of arguments
advanced by all parties, the Learned Tribunal passed the Award dated
10.06.2024, whereby and whereunder a sum of Rs. 77,11,500/- (Rupees
seventy-seven lakhs eleven thousand and five hundred only) was awarded
as compensation for the death of the deceased in the aforesaid accident.
3. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the
impugned Judgment and Award dated 10.06.2024, passed by the Learned
Tribunal, the appellant-insurance company has preferred the present appeal
before this Court.
4. Heard Ms. R. Purkayastha, learned counsel appearing
for the appellant, as well as Mr. B. Majumder and Mr. T. Debbarma,
learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
5. Ms. Purkayastha, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant, submits that the impugned Judgment and Award is not tenable in
the eye of law and the same deserves to be quashed. It is further submitted
that the Learned Tribunal erred in calculating the transport charges, which
should be set aside.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the
respondents submits that the Judgment and Award passed by the Learned
Tribunal is just and proper and requires no further interference.
7. Heard and perused the records.
8. Upon careful consideration of the submissions and the
materials on record, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the Award
passed by the Learned Tribunal. The total compensation of Rs. 77,11,500/-
awarded to the claimants is found to be just and reasonable. The only
objection raised by the insurance company pertains to the sum of Rs.
10,000/- awarded under the head of transportation charges. However, this
Court is of the considered view that such incidental expenses are naturally
incurred in the aftermath of a serious accident and need not always be
substantiated by strict documentary evidence. The Tribunal has rightly
adopted a practical and reasonable approach. The compensation is in
accordance with the settled principles of law and does not suffer from any
legal infirmity. Hence, the appeal stands dismissed. The Judgment and
Award passed by the Learned Tribunal is affirmed in its entirety.
9. As a consequence, any stay granted earlier stands
vacated. All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD, J
suhanjit
SABYASACHI Digitally signed by
SABYASACHI GHOSH
GHOSH Date: 2025.08.05 15:30:53
+05'30'
