ORDER

15.11.2022

1. Heard Ms. I. Das, learned counsel for the appellant – United India Insurance Company Limited. Also heard Shri D. Baruah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent – claimant.

2. As regard the service upon the respondents, there was a paper publication in terms of an order of this Court which was made and supported by an affidavit as reflected in the Office Note dated 15.03.2018.

3. The present appeal has been preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and award dated 29.11.2012 passed by the learned MACT, Dibrugarh in MAC Case No. 95/2005. By the impugned judgment, a sum of Rs. 5,04,320/- (Rupees Five Lakh Four Thousand Three Hundred Twenty) has been directed to be paid with simple interest at the rate of 6 % per annum with effect from date of filing of the claim petition, i.e., 14.09.2005. The liability has been divided amongst the present appellant and the driver and owner of another offending vehicle namely a truck.

4. Before dealing with the grounds of appeal, the bare facts are required to be noted which are as follows.

5. The claimant is the widow of the deceased Putul Gogoi, who was a Grade -IV employee of Bahanipather M.V. School in the district of Dibrugarh. On 21.02.2003, the deceased was coming in a Motor Cycle as a pillion rider which had dashed with a truck bearing No. ARD-136 causing grievous injuries as a result of which he had succumbed. The claim petition was accordingly filed before the learned Tribunal seeking compensation.

6. While the claimant in support of her claim petition had adduced evidence as claimant witness and had adduced four numbers of documents namely the Death Certificate, the PM Report, the Salary Certificate and the Police Report, the O.P. No. 1 namely, New India Assurance Company Limited i.e., the Insurance Company of the truck had filed written statement and had adduced evidence and had exhibited two documents. The O.P. party nos. 2 & 3 had filed written statement but did not cross examine or adduce any evidence. It is the case of the present appellant that it was impleaded at a later stage whereafter, it had filed the written statement. The materials before this Court would show that the Charge Sheet was filed in the connected police case being Moran P.S. Case No. 26/2003 under Section 279, 338,304A and 427 of the IPC against the driver of the Truck. However, the opposite party no. 1 namely, the New India Assurance Company Limited had a categorical stand that as on the date of the accident, there was no valid insurance cover of the truck and therefore, it was not liable and in this regard, the Insurance Policy was also exhibited.

7. Ms. Das, the learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the liability in the criminal case being towards the truck, the appellant - Insurance Company who was the insurer of the Motor Cycle should not have been settled with any liability as the cause of accident was because of the negligence of the truck. The learned counsel has further submitted that apart from the fact that the appellant is not liable to pay any compensation, the further fact which is required to be considered is that the appellant was not even made a party in the claim petition and was impleaded at a later stage and therefore, the direction to pay interest from the date of filing is otherwise erroneous and would be unnecessarily onerous.

8. Ms. Das, the learned counsel accordingly submits that due interference should be made by this Court in exercise of its appellate powers by holding that the appellant is not liable to pay the compensation or any part thereof.

9. On the other hand, Shri D. Baruah, learned counsel for the contesting claimant has submitted that the amount in question is not a huge amount considering that the same is awarded in a death case of a Government Employee who was working in an M.V. School.

10. The learned counsel has submitted that the grounds taken in the present appeal are not tenable legally. Sh