GAHC010163162024

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : CRP/90/2024

SUBALA BALA ROY

W/O- LATE SATISH CHANDRA ROY, VILL.- JINKATA PART-II, P.O.

MAHAMAYAHAT, P.S. GOLAKGANJ-783335, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM

VERSUS

PRASENJIT BARMAN @ BARMA AND 3 ORS

S/O- LATE PARESH NATH BARMAN, VILL. AND P.O. HALAKURA, DIST.

DHUBRI, ASSAM

2:ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

MADHAB TOWER

3RD FLOOR

G.S. ROAD

RUKMINI GAON

GHY-781022

ASSAM

3:YUBA SANGHA CLUB

VILL.- JHAGRARPAR PART-III

P.O. AND DIST. DHUBRI

ASSAM

4:AMINUR ALI

S/O- NUR ALI

VILL.- JHAGRARPAR PART-I

P.O. AND DIST. DHUBRI

ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A R AGARWALA, MR ADITYA AGARWALA

Advocate for the Respondent : MR T KALITA (R2), L DAS (R1),MR P J BORAH (R1),MR B

PRASAD (R1),MR. A KAKATI (R2)

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA

ORDER

01.11.2025

1. Heard Mr. A.R. Agarwala, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Prasad, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 as well as Mr. T. Kalita, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.

2. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner impugning the order dated 29.06.2024 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhubri in MAC Case No.65/2021(D) by which the prayer for framing additional issues was rejected by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhubri.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has filed the MAC Case No.65/2021(D) seeking compensation on account of death of her daughter in a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. He submits that by order dated 22.02.2025 the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhubri allowed an application filed by the respondent no.1 in this case for impleading him as claimant no.2 in the said MAC Case on the ground that he has happens to be the husband of the deceased.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted the present petitioner has raised the issue of validity of the marriage of her daughter with the claimant no.2, therefore, he had filed an application on 21.05.2024 which was registered as Petition No.865/2024 proposing following issues :

(i) Whether the petitioner no.2 is the legally married husband of the deceased.

(ii) Whether the petitioner no.2 is a legal representative and dependent of the deceased.

He submits that as only a dependent can take claim for compensation in the event of death of a person on whom the said person was dependent. The issue proposed by the present petitioner where necessary to decide the MAC Case No.65/2021(D). He however submits that while passing the impugned order the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhubri had ignored this vital aspect. He therefore submits that the impugned order dated 29.06.2024 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhubri in MAC Case No.65/2021(D) is liable to be set aside.

5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent no.1 has submitted that this Revision Petition is not maintainable in as much as the order impugned in this case is an Interlocutory Order and therefore under proviso to Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure the revision is bared. He further submits that the question as to whether the claimant no.2 is the legal representative of the deceased has tentatively already decided by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal by its order dated 22.02.2022 while allowing the prayer for impleadment of claimant no.2 in the said claim case. He further submits that the said order has not been impugned by the present petitioner and therefore this Revision Petition is liable to be dismissed. On the other hand, Mr. T. Kalita, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 (Insurance Company) has also made similar submissions like that of the learned counsel for the respondent no.1. He also submits that the order dated 22.02.2022 has not been challenged by the petitioner. He further submits that while deciding the issue as to whether the claimants are entitled