Disposed

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru. Its Regional Manager Lko. v. Ekta Agarwal and Others

Allahabad HC12 Mar 2024FAFO/44/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court admitted an appeal challenging a Labour Court award in a motor accident case. During arguments, the court questioned if the insurance company could challenge the award given its recovery right and whether the death was accident-related. The court stayed coercive action if the appellant deposits the decretal amount and set the list for later in April 2024.

What did the court decide?

No coercive action shall be taken against the appellant if the total decretal amount along with interest is deposited within four weeks; the same shall be invested in a fixed deposit account.

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru. Its… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 4

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 44 of 2024

¶3

Appellant :- National Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru. Its Regional Manager Lko. Respondent :- Ekta Agarwal And Others Counsel for Appellant :- Nazia Khatoon,Saurabh Chandra Counsel for Respondent :- Balendu Shekhar,Ashok Kumar Dubey,Sourabh Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard, Shri Saurabh Chandra, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Balendu Shekhar, learned counsel for the respondentclaimants No.1 to 3.

¶6

This court had passed the following order on 19.02.2024:-

¶7

"Heard Sri Saurabh Chandra learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Balendu Shekhar learned counsel for the respondent nos.1, 2 and 3.

¶8

Learned counsel for the claimant-respondent submits that the appellant insurance company has no right to file the appeal as the claim petition filed by the respondent claimant has been allowed on account of violation of terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy and right of recovery from the owner has been given to the appellant. He relies on the order dated 24.04.2013 passed in FAFO no.418 of 2013 (Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. Lko.Thr.Manager vs Arvind Kumar Yadav And Another), which has been passed on the basis of two judgments.

¶9

Per contra, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the accident had occurred on 09.09.2015 and the appellant had died on 19.11.2015 i.e. after more than two months and the cause of death as per the patient history sheet of KGMC, where the deceased had died, is not related to the accident or any head injury as alleged by the respondents. Rather, it has been observed in the patient history that the deceased was alcoholic for the last 8-9 years and had left only 2-3 years back and he was suffering from chronic alcoholic liver disease (CALD) for the last 2-3 years and the same was the cause of death, but without considering it the award has been made. In regard to the order relied by the learned counsel for the respondent, he seeks time to go through the same.

¶10

Learned counsel for the respondent-claimant also seeks time to bring the case laws, relied in the aforesaid case.

¶11

As prayed, list on 26.02.2024 in top 20 cases. "

¶12

Thereafter the following order was passed on 26.02.2024:-

¶13

"In regard to the objection raised by the learned counsel for the respondents that the appellant has no right to challenge the impugned judgment and award as right of recovery has been given to the appellant, learned counsel for the appellant submits that since the death was not an outcome of the accident as it could not be proved, he can challenge the same.

¶14

He relies on the judgment of United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Rajendra Singh & ors reported in AIR 2000 SC 1165. He further relies on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Shila Datta & ors and United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Bhushan Sachdeva and ors; AIR 2002 SC 662.

¶15

He further relying on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Union India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Shila Datta & ors; AIR 2012 SC 86 submits that similar issue has been referred to the larger Bench by a three Judge Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court and he could not get that the same has been answered by the larger Bench yet.

¶16

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent relies on the judgment in the case of National Insurance Co. ltd vs Swarn Singh; 2004 (1) T.A.C 321 (S.C) and submits that the same is being followed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. He also relies on a Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Smt. Shashi Prabha Sharma & 4 ors in First Appeal From Order no.2174 of 2014. In the said case, it has been mentioned that in the case of National Insurance Company ltd vs Parvathneni; (2009) 8 SCC 785, similar issue has been referred to the larger Bench.

¶17

In view of above, learned counsel for the respondents prays for and is granted two weeks' time to seek instructions and also verify as to whether the decisions referred to the larger Bench by the Supreme Court has been decided or not.

¶18

As prayed, list in the week commencing 11.03.3024 in terms of the earlier order."

¶19

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that he could not get that the matters referred to the Larger Bench have been decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court or not, however he submits that those matters are not in regard to the right of recovery granted to the Insurance Company, therefore they are not applicable on facts and circumstances of the present case. However he could not dispute that the medical prescriptions could not be filed before the Tribunal and the document, on the basis of which the finding has been recorded by the Tribunal that the same could have been the cause of death on account of head injury, could not be got proved through any expert.

¶20

The matter requires consideration.

¶21

Admit.

¶22

Issue notice to the respondents No.4 to 6.

¶23

Notice to respondent-claimants no.1 to 3 is not required to be issued as learned counsel for the respondent-claimants has already put in appearance.

¶24

Summon the Lower Court Record.

¶25

Steps to be taken within a week.

¶26

List with service report.

¶27

In case the appellant deposits the total decretal amount alongwith interest with the concerned Tribunal after adjusting the statutory deposits made before this court within a period of four weeks from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the appellant in pursuance of the impugned award till the next date of listing.

¶28

On deposit of the amount the same shall be invested in an interest bearing fixed deposit account in a nationalized bank initially for a period of one year with an auto renewal facility.

¶29

List in the last week of April, 2024.

¶30

...................................... .(Rajnish Kumar,J.) Order Date :- 12.3.2024 Banswar

¶31

Digitally signed by :- RAM NARESH BANSWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru. Its Regional Manager Lko. v. Ekta Agarwal and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru. Its Regional Manager Lko. v. Ekta Agarwal and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sanjay Singh vs Smt. Bacchi Pandai and Another

National Insurance Company Limited Thru. Its Manager /Assistant Manager Lucknow vs Ramu and 5 Others

Shiv Kumari vs Pancham and Another

Arvind Kumar Dixit and Another vs Smt. Rajbeti @ Ramkuwari and 4 Others

Kalpana and Another vs Pankaj Srivastava Divya and 2 Others

Nazar Mohd. and 4 Others vs Mohd. Hafeez and Another