The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Sri Amit Deb
2025 Latest Caselaw 1196 Tri

Tripura High Court

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Sri Amit Deb on 30 October, 2025

                         HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                               AGARTALA
                          MAC App. No.47 of 2024
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Represented by its Divisional Manager
of H.G.B. Road, Agartala, near Sarkar Nursing Home,
P.S. West Agartala, Dist. West Tripura.
(Insurer of TR01 G-4151, Maruti Swift).
                                                                 ----Appellant(s)
                                      Versus
1. Sri Amit Deb,
   S/o: Sri Pradip Deb, of Madhya Laxmibil,
   P.O. & P.S. Bishalgarh,
   District: Sepahijala,
   Presently residing at Bordowali
   C/o Sri Tapan Poddar near
   Choudhury Mill, P.S.: A.D. Nagar,
   Dist.: West Tripura.
                                                      ----Claimant Respondent(s)

2. Sri Khokan Sarkar, S/o: Late Chitta Ranjan Sarkar, Of Laxman Para, Amtali, Near Amtali Post Office, P.O. & P.S. Amtali, Dist.: West Tripura.

    (Owner of TR01 G-4151, Maruti Swift)
                                                       ----Owner Respondent (s)

    For Appellant(s)              :      Mr. Partha Sarathi Roy, Adv.
    For Respondent(s)             :      Mr. Gitangshu Sekhar Das, Adv.
                                         Mr. Kushal Deb, Adv.
    Date of hearing
    and delivery of
    Judgment & Order              :      30.10.2025

    Whether fit for
    reporting                     :      NO


                      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT
                            Judgment & Order (Oral)

This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,

1988 is preferred by the appellant-Insurance Company challenging the

judgment and award dated 06.02.2024 delivered by Learned Member,

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 1, West Tripura, Agartala in T.S.

(MAC) No.27 of 2020. By the said judgment and award, Learned Tribunal

below allowed the claim petition of the claimant-petitioner, the respondent

herein and awarded compensation of Rs.12,40,000/- with interest at the

rate of 9% per annum w.e.f. 13.02.2020 i.e. from the date of filing of the

claim petition to till the date of actual payment. Further, the Learned

Tribunal below fastened the liability of payment of compensation upon the

present appellant-Insurance Company.

2. Heard Learned Counsel, Mr. Partha Sarathi Roy appearing on

behalf of the appellant-Insurance Company. Also heard Learned Counsel,

Mr. Gitangshu Sekhar Das along with Learned Counsel, Mr. Kushal Deb

appearing on behalf of the respondent-claimant petitioner. None appeared

on behalf of the owner of the offending vehicle bearing registration

number TR-01-G-4151.

3. At the time of hearing, Learned Counsel for the appellant-

Insurance Company first of all drawn the attention of this court that in this

case the accident took place due to collision between two vehicles and

there was contributory negligence on the part of another vehicle but, the

Learned Tribunal below only implicated the present appellant-Insurance

Company to be responsible for making payment of compensation to the

respondent-claimant petitioner. It was further submitted by Learned

Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company that at the time of

determination of compensation, the Learned Tribunal below assessed the

monthly income of the respondent-claimant petitioner at Rs.10,000/- per

month in absence of any documentary evidence on record, which was not

proper. So, Learned Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company urged

for interference of the said judgment and award passed by the Learned

Tribunal below. It was further submitted by the Learned Counsel for the

appellant-Insurance Company that the Learned Tribunal below, at the

time of determination of compensation, awarded interest at the rate of

9% per annum, which was also too high as in most of the cases, this

Court also has awarded interest at the rate of 7.5%. So, on these 3(three)

points Learned Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company urged for

modification of the judgment and award dated 06.02.2024 delivered by

the Learned Tribunal below by way of interference.

4. On the other hand, Learned Counsel, Mr. Gitangshu Sekhar

Das appearing on behalf of the respondent-claimant petitioner submitted

that the accident took place on 13.11.2019 and the present respondent-

claimant petitioner twice plucked in Madhyamik Examination. Although the

respondent-claimant petitioner could not adduce any documentary

evidence in support of his income, but, in the claim petition it was

asserted by the respondent-claimant petitioner that he was a mason by

profession and used to earn Rs.12,000/-. Learned Counsel for the

respondent-claimant petitioner submitted that the Learned Tribunal below,

in absence of any documentary evidence on record, on the basis of the

notification dated 04.08.2023 of this High Court, determined the monthly

income of the respondent-claimant petitioner at Rs.10,000/- per month,

which was reasonable and rational and to rebut the contention there was

no contrary evidence on record from the side of the appellant-Insurance

Company. It was further submitted by Learned Counsel for the

respondent-claimant petitioner that from the charge-sheet it is clear that

the I.O. after completion of investigation laid Amtali PS C/S No.85/20

dated 30.11.2020 under Section 279/338/427 of IPC against the driver of

the offending vehicle bearing registration No.TR-01-G-4151 (Maruti Swift)

and the charge-sheet has been duly proved by the respondent-claimant

petitioner before the Learned Tribunal below. Furthermore, challenging

the investigation of the I.O., no prayer was made by the appellant-

Insurance Company before the Learned Jurisdictional Court. The

appellant-insurance company also did not adduce any independent eye-

witnesses to cast doubt on the final report of the I.O. regarding the

involvement of two vehicles in the alleged accident in order to draw an

adverse inference, as submitted by the Learned Counsel for the appellant-

Insurance Company. Moreso, before the Learned Tribunal below, the

present appellant-Insurance Company also did not adduce any evidence

on record to discard the evidence of the respondent-claimant petitioner.

Learned Counsel for the respondent-claimant petitioner submitted that the

Learned Tribunal below, considering the evidence on record rightly

determined the amount of compensation and awarded rate of interest as

in most of the cases, Hon'ble the Apex Court also awards interest at the

rate of 9% per annum. So, Learned Counsel for the respondent-claimant

petitioner urged for dismissal of the present appeal as there was no

infirmity in the judgment and award delivered by Learned Tribunal below.

5. The respondent-claimant petitioner filed one claim petition

before the Learned Tribunal below alleging inter alia that on 13.11.2019 at

about 10:00 p.m., he along with his one friend Shati Saha (rider of the

motorbike) were proceeding towards Bishalgarh by riding a motorbike

bearing registration No.TR-07-C-8019 as a pillion rider. At around 10:30

p.m. when they reached Chowmuhani Bazar, in a turning near the temple

on Agartala-Bishalgarh road, his rider friend saw one of his friend namely

Swarup Deb Roy and stopped the motorbike on the left side of the road to

speak with that friend. When the claimant-petitioner, the rider of the bike

(his friend) and said Swarup Deb Roy were gossiping with each other that

time one vehicle bearing No.TR-01-G-4151 (Maruti Swift) was coming

from Udaipur side with tremendous speed and being lost control over the

vehicle, suddenly dashed against the motorbike of the rider Shati Saha

resulting which the respondent-claimant petitioner and Shati Saha fell

down on the ground from the motorbike and sustained injuries on their

persons. The present respondent-claimant petitioner namely, Amit Deb

sustained multiple fracture injuries on his leg and grievous cut injury on

his right hand including bleeding injuries on other parts of his body and

said Shati Saha and Swarup Deb Roy also sustained grievous injuries on

their persons. After the accident, the injured respondent-claimant

petitioner was shifted to AGMC & GBP Hospital, Agartala by the Fire

Service Rescue Vehicle in alarming condition wherein he was admitted and

as the condition of the injured was deteriorating so, the attending doctor

advised him for amputation of the right leg under the knee. Thereafter,

without any surgery in AGMC & GBP Hospital the injured was taken to

Bhaumik Polyclinic & Nursing Home, Agartala on 15.11.2019 and got him

admitted therein. During treatment, the injured had to undergo operation

three times to save his right leg and received treatment therein till

04.12.2019. It was also submitted that he is still undergoing treatment

and he has already spent Rs.3,00,000/- including other expenses for his

treatment. The respondent-claimant petitioner also stated in his claim

petition that at the time of accident he was 20 years old, working as a

mason and earning more than Rs.12,000/- per month but due to the

accident he has become permanently disabled and lost his earning

capacity. It was further submitted that the accident took place due to rash

and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle bearing

registration No. TR-01-G-4151 (Maruti Swift) and on that issue Amtali PS

Case No.220/2019 under Sections 279/337/338 of I.P.C. was registered

and accordingly, the respondent-claimant petitioner filed the claim

petition. The claim petition was contested by the owner of the vehicle and

it was submitted that his vehicle was duly insured with the present

appellant-Insurance Company. It was further submitted that at the time of

accident the vehicle was driven by one Shipan Sharma and the owner of

the vehicle denied other assertions of the respondent-claimant petitioner

in the claim petition. The OP No.2 i.e. the appellant-Insurance Company

also contested the same by filing objection denying the assertions of the

respondent-claimant petitioner and finally submitted that the claim

petition is subjected to strict proof by the respondent-claimant petitioner.

6. Upon the pleadings of the parties, Learned Tribunal below

framed the following issues:

"(1) Did petitioner Amit Deb sustain injuries in a road traffic accident occurred on 13.11.2019 at about 1030 hours at Chowmuhani Bazar under Amtali Police Station on Agartala-Sabroom road, out of use of vehicles bearing registration No.TR-07-C-

8019 (Motor Bike) and TR-01-G-4151 (Maruti Swift) vehicle, due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of Maruti vehicle?

(2) Is the petitioner entitled to get compensation? If so, to what amount and who is liable to pay the same?

(3) To what other reliefs the parties are entitled?"

7. To substantiate the issues, the respondent-claimant petitioner

examined himself as PW-1 and relied upon certain documents as evidence

which were marked as Exbt.1 to Exbt.5. The respondent-claimant

petitioner also adduced the evidence of Dr. Tapan Kumar Das as PW-2.

The owner of the vehicle was examined as OPW-1 and the documents

relied upon were marked as Exbt.A to Exbt.D. For the sake of

convenience, the exhibits of the parties are mentioned hereinbelow:

"Exhibits of the claimant-petitioner i.e. PW-1:

Exbt 1(i) to 1(iii): FIR under Section 154 of Cr.P.C. along with ejahar Exbt 1(iv): Seizure List Exbt 1(v), 1(vi): Injury report Exbt 1(vii) to Exbt. 1(xiii): Final Form/Report Exbt 2: Discharge summary of AGMC & GBP Hospital Exbt 3: Discharge certificate of Bhaumik Polyclinic & Nursing Home, Agartala Exbt 4: TBSE Madhyamik Examination Admit Card Exbt 5 series: Cash memos, Money receipts Exbt 6: Disability Certificate dated 17.05.2022

Exhibits of the owner of the vehicle: Exbt A: Registration certificate of vehicle No.TR-01- G-4151.

Exbt B: Insurance Certificate cum policy schedule Exbt C: Driving licence

Exbt D: Permit in respect of Contract Carriage permit (Motor Car Permit)"

Finally, after conclusion of enquiry Learned Tribunal below

allowed the claim petition filed by the claimant petitioner. The operative

portion of the judgment and award runs as follows:

"AWARD It is, therefore, held that the claimant petitioner Sri Amit Deb is entitled to get compensation of Rs.12,40,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakh Forty Thousand) only with interest @ 9% per annum w.e.f. 13.02.2020 i.e. the date of filing of this case till the date of actual payment. The Opposite Party No.2, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. shall pay the amount of compensation with interest within 30 days from today in terms of Section 168(3) of M.V. Act, 1988.

Out of the awarded amount of compensation inclusive of interest, 50% shall be kept in a fixed deposit scheme in his name in any Nationalized Bank of his locality for a period of five years and the rest 50% shall be paid to him through his Bank Account. However, the claimant petitioner shall be entitled to receive monthly interest therefrom for his day to day expenses. No loan or premature withdrawal shall be permitted from the fixed deposit account without prior permission of this Tribunal.

Supply copy of this award free of cost to the parties.

The claim application stands disposed of on contest.

Enter the result in the relevant Register as well as in the CIS."

8. Challenging the said judgment and award, the present appeal

is filed by the appellant-Insurance Company.

9. I have heard both the sides at length and perused the

judgment and award delivered by Learned Tribunal below and also

perused the record of the Learned Tribunal below.

10. It is the admitted position that in this case the I.O. after

completion of investigation laid charge-sheet against the driver of the

offending vehicle i.e. Maruti Swift bearing No.TR-01-G-4151. From the

record of the Learned Tribunal below it also appears that before the

Learned Tribunal below, the present appellant-Insurance Company did not

take the plea that the accident occurred due to the collision of both the

vehicles and there was contributory negligence on the part of the rider of

the motorbike. Even no oral evidence in this regard was adduced by the

appellant-Insurance Company before the Learned Tribunal below. Even

the charge-sheet submitted by the I.O. was also not challenged by the

appellant-Insurance Company. Furthermore, the appellant-Insurance

Company although cross-examined the respondent-claimant petitioner but

by the style of cross-examination the appellant-Insurance Company could

not create any doubt to disbelieve the evidence of the respondent-

claimant petitioner nor made any cloud to disbelieve the final report

submitted by the I.O. implicating the driver of the vehicle bearing No.TR-

01-G-4151 to be involved with the alleged accident. So, the submission of

the Learned Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company in this regard

cannot be accepted.

11. Regarding the determination of monthly income, admittedly

the respondent-claimant petitioner before the Learned Tribunal could not

adduce any documentary evidence on record. But it is on record that the

respondent-claimant petitioner took the plea that he was a mason by

profession at the time of alleged accident. It is also on record that he

twice appeared in Madhyamik Examination but he could not qualify the

same. However, the Learned Tribunal below, based upon the notification

of this Court dated 04.08.2023, determined the monthly income of the

respondent-claimant petitioner at Rs.10,000/- per month, which in my

considered opinion was proper. Even, if we ignore the said notification as

relied upon by the Learned Tribunal below and presume that he was a day

labourer or mason, still during the year 2019 he definitely could earn not

less than Rs.10,000/- per month. So, on perusal of the judgment and

award of the Learned Tribunal below, I do not find any infirmity in the said

judgment and award regarding determination of monthly income of the

respondent-claimant petitioner at Rs.10,000/- per month in absence of

contrary evidence on record.

12. Now, regarding the rate of interest as alleged by Learned

Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company, it appears that the Learned

Tribunal below at the time of delivery of judgment and award determined

the interest at the rate of 9% per annum w.e.f. the date of filing of the

claim petition to till the date of actual payment, which in my considered

view appears to be in higher side because in most of the cases this Court

also awarded interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum. But, without

assigning any reason, the Learned Tribunal below has awarded interest at

the rate of 9% per annum, which in my considered view needs to be

interfered with in absence of cogent grounds. However, as the grounds

raised by Learned Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company cannot

be considered to be a lawful one excepting the issue of rate of interest so,

the present appeal be disposed of only to the extent of rate of interest.

13. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant-Insurance

Company is partly allowed with modification that the appellant-Insurance

Company shall pay compensation of Rs.12,40,000/- to the respondent-

claimant petitioner as awarded by Learned Tribunal below with interest at

the rate of 7.5% per annum in place of 9% per annum w.e.f. 13.02.2020

i.e. from the date of filing of the claim petition to till the date of actual

payment within a period of 60(sixty) days from the date of passing of this

judgment/award to the Learned Tribunal below. The disbursal of award be

made in accordance with the judgment and award delivered by Learned

Tribunal below on 06.02.2024.

With this observation, the present appeal stands disposed of.

A copy of this judgment be furnished free of cost to the

Learned Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company for information and

compliance. Also a copy of this judgment be supplied to Learned Counsel

for the respondent-claimant petitioner free of cost for information. Send

down the LCR to the Learned Tribunal below along with a copy of this

judgment and order.

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

JUDGE

Snigdha

MOUMIT Digitally signed by MOUMITA DATTA

A DATTA Date: 2025.10.30 16:08:26 +05'30'