SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Jhk) 1334

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
S.N. PATHAK, J.
National Insurance Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Mridula Pramanik W/o Late Sukra Pramanik – Respondent
M.A. No. 235 of 2016
Decided On : 22-12-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Alok Lal.
For the Respondents: Amit Das, Sahay Gaurav Piyush.
For the Owner : Tejo Mistry.
For the Claimant : Tapeshwarnath Mishra, Prachi Mahato.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of liability and quantum of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, considering the violation of insurance policy terms and the relevance of compassionate appointment.

Headnote:

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - Compensation Case - Motor Vehicles Act - [Section 2(30), Section 147, Section 149, Section 163A, Section 166] - The court discussed the liability of insurance companies, violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy, computation of compensation, and the relevance of compassionate appointment. The court relied on legal provisions from the Motor Vehicles Act to determine the liability of the insurance companies and the quantum of compensation. The court's decision was influenced by interpretations of the Act's provisions, particularly regarding violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy and the relevance of compassionate appointment.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved a compensation claim for the death of an individual in a road accident due to rash and negligent driving. The claimants sought compensation from the insurance companies of the vehicles involved, and the court below awarded compensation to the claimants, holding the National Insurance Co. liable to pay the compensation amount.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the claimants were entitled to receive compensation, and upheld the decision of the lower court, directing the National Insurance Co. to pay the compensation amount to the claimants.

Issues: (i) Maintainability of the case and liability for the death of the deceased (ii) Liability of insurance companies to pay compensation (iii) Violation of insurance policy terms and conditions (iv) Entitlement and quantum of compensation (v) Entitlement to any other relief

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that there was no violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy, and the relevance of compassionate appointment did not affect the computation of compensation. The court's decision was influenced by legal principles established in relevant judgments and interpretations of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the National Insurance Co. was directed to pay the compensation amount to the claimants. The appellant-Insurance Co. was permitted to withdraw any deposited statutory amount.

JUDGMENT :

S.N. PATHAK, J.

1. Heard the parties.

2. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the Award/Judgment dated 05.02.2016, passed by learned District Judge-III-cum-Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jamshedpur in Compensation Case No. 142 of 2012.

3. As per the factual matrix, the compensation case was filed by the Claimants before the learned District Judge-III-cum-Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Jamshedpur for payment of compensation on account of death of one Sukra Pramanik, who died in a road accident, which happened due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the Indigo Car bearing Reg. No. JH-22B-1909(T). It was also pleaded before the learned Court below that at the time of death, the said Sukra Pramanik was earning Rs. 40,000/- per month as salary and he was a government employee. It was further pleaded that the offending vehicle was insured with National Insurance Co. and the motorcycle of the deceased was insured with the ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. It was also pleaded that at the time of accident the deceased was a government employee and hence, while computing the compensation amount, the future prospects should also be taken into consideration and the claim application be allowed with interest.

4. On being noticed, the ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. appeared through his counsel and it has been submitted that at the time of accident, the motorcycle of the deceased was insured with this Insurance Co. and hence, the deceased was not a third party to be compensate by the present Insurance Co. Further, it was submitted that charge-sheet was submitted against the driver of the Indigo Car.

5. Learned counsel for the National Insurance Co. has submitted that Car was insured with this Insurance Co. however, there was violation of terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy and accident took place due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the motorcycle. It was further submitted that there was no prove of income of the deceased and there was no future prospect. It was also submitted that the applicants are claiming exorbitant compensation, which is not legally permissible.

6. Learned Tribunal, on perusal of the documents brought on record and after hearing counsel for the parties and upon going through the written statement as well as other documents, framed following issues for proper and just adjudication of the case:

(i) Whether this case is maintainable in present form or not and whether the deceased died due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of vehicle no. JH-05AQ-5708 Or is it a case of contributory negligence?

(ii) Whether vehicle was insured with respective OP Insurance Companies and whether OP Insurance Companies are liable to make payment of compensation?

(iii) Whether owners of the vehicle has violated any terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy including requirement of valid Driving License?

(iv) Whether applicants are entitled to get compensation if so what would be quantum of compensation?

(v) Whether applicants are entitled to get any other relief or reliefs?

7. Learned Court below after hearing the parties and after perusing the exhibited documents and oral evidences, elaborately dealt the issues framed and thereafter, found that the claimants are entitled to receive compensation amount. Resultantly, the learned Tribunal directed the National Insurance Co. to draw account payee cheque for 80% of the compensation amount of Rs. 27,46,340/- in name of Mridula Pramanik, who would receive this cheque also on behalf of minors Applicant Nos. 2, 3 and 4. OP National Insurance Co. is further directed to draw another cheque for remaining 20% of the compensation amount in the name of Sumitra Pramanik who is mother of the deceased. All cheques should be drawn with upto date interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of this claim case till payment and cheques should be handed over to applicants within 30 days of this order.

8. The correctness of the said aw

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top