Allowed

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., v. Narayan Wary and Ors.

Gauhati HC6 Jun 2018I.A.(Civil)/891/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court stayed the operation of an impugned award under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, subject to a 50% pre-deposit by the appellant within six weeks. The court also directed the opposite parties to file particulars regarding the legal representative of the deceased opposite party No.1 and allowed the interim application.

What did the court decide?

Stay of impugned award on condition of 50% pre-deposit within six weeks; EA (interim) set aside and fixed deposits in the name of the surviving opposite party No.2 directed.

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs Narayan Wary and Ors. — Execution and Attachment | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010016492017

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : MACApp. 118/2017

¶5

1:ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,

¶6

HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT ORIENTAL HOUSE A 25/27 ASAF ALI ROAD, NEW DELHI-110002 AND ONE OF ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT GUWAHATI REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:NARAYAN WARY and ORS, S/O LT. SANDURAM WARY, FATHER OF DECEASED

¶9

2:SMT. DALE BALA WARY W/O SRI NAYARAM WARY MOTHER OF THE DECEASED BOTHE ARE RESIDENTS OF VILL. KAKRIKHOT P.O. NAYAEKGAON P.S. and DIST. KOKRAJHAR B.T.C. ASSAM.

¶10

3:DIVISIONAL MANAGER NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. BONGAIGAON DIVISIONAL OFFICE P.O. and DIST. BONGAIGAON ASSAM INSURER OF THE VEHICEL TRUCK NO. AMN-4239

¶11

4:MD. FAZAR ALI AHMED S/O LT. TAMIZUDDIN AHMED VILL. FULKUMARI P.O. BIDYAPUR DIST. BONGAIGAON ASSAM OWNER OF THE VEHICLE TRUCK NO. AMN-4239

¶12

5:AJIT CHANDRA RAMCHIARY

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

S/O LT. RABIRAM RAMCHIARY W/NO. 7 BAGANSHALI R.N.B. ROAD KOKRAJHAR B.T.C. ASSAM OWNER OF THE VEHICLE MAHENDRA SAVARI NO. AS-01/AC-136

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS.M CHOUDHURY

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : MR.J U AHMED

¶17

Linked Case : I.A.(Civil) 891/2017

¶18

1:ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

¶19

HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT ORIENTAL HOUSE A 25/27 ASAF ALI ROAD

¶20

NEW DELHI-110002 AND ONE OF ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT GUWAHATI REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER

¶21

VERSUS

¶22

1:NARAYAN WARY and ORS

¶23

S/O LT. SANDURAM WARY FATHER OF THE DECEASED

¶24

2:SMT. DALE BALA WARY W/O SRI NAYARAM WARY MOTHER OF THE DECEASED BOTHE ARE RESIDENTS OF VILL. KAKRIKHOT P.O. NAYAEKGAON P.S. and DIST. KOKRAJHAR B.T.C. ASSAM.

¶25

3:DIVISIONAL MANAGER NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. BONGAIGAON DIVISIONAL OFFICE P.O. and DIST. BONGAIGAON ASSAM INSURER OF THE VEHICEL TRUCK NO. AMN-4239

¶26

Page No.# 3/4

¶27

4:MD. FAZAR ALI AHMED S/O LT. TAMIZUDDIN AHMED VILL. FULKUMARI P.O. BIDYAPUR DIST. BONGAIGAON ASSAM OWNER OF THE VEHICLE TRUCK NO. AMN-4239

¶28

5:AJIT CHANDRA RAMCHIARY S/O LT. RABIRAM RAMCHIARY W/NO. 7 BAGANSHALI R.N.B. ROAD KOKRAJHAR B.T.C. ASSAM OWNER OF THE VEHICLE MAHENDRA SAVARI NO. AS-01/AC-1362

¶29

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS.M CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : MR.N N BHUYAN

¶30

BEFORE

¶31

HON BLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

¶32

ORDER

¶33

Date : 06-06-2018

¶34

Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Mr. J. U. Ahmed, learned counsel for the opposite parties No.1 and 2 and Mr. A.J. Saikia, learned counsel for the opposite party No.3.

¶35

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the present case, the accident involved collusion of 2 vehicles. Therefore, the deceased who was the son of the opposite parties No.1 and 2 died. It is submitted that the principles settled by the various decision has held the vehicle involved in the accident to be guilty of contributory negligence. The opposite parties No.1 and 2 were not entitled to benefit of own mistake of the deceased. Hence it is submitted that the applicant be exempted from making pre-deposit as a condition of stay for enforcement of the award.

¶36

This Court is of the opinion that it required examination whether the opposite parties No.1 and 2 were entitled to any compensation by computing the compensation in terms of Employees Compensation Act, 1923. Under the circumstances, as the connected appeal has

¶37

Page No.# 4/4

¶38

been admitted for hearing, this Court is inclined to stay the operation of the impugned judgment and award dated 29.11.2008 passed by the learned Member, MACT, Kokrajhar, in MAC Case No.11/2008, subject to condition that the applicant shall deposit 50% of their share of the award before the Registry of this Court within a period of 6(six) weeks from today.

¶39

It is made clear that if such deposit is not made within the time then this order shall not be a bar for the enforcement of the award in respect of the share of the applicant.

¶40

At this stage, the learned counsel for the opposite party No.1 and 2 submits that the opposite party No.1 has expired. However, he does not have the necessary details. Therefore, the learned counsel for the opposite parties No.1 and 2 are directed to submit the necessary particulars and to discuss if the opposite party No.1 had any other legal representative apart from opposite party No.2. The learned counsel for the appellant shall take notice of the submission that the opposite party No.1 has expired.

¶41

In view of the submissions as regard death of the opposite party No.1, on such deposit being made, the Registry shall convert the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- in form of 2 fixed deposits of Rs.50,000/- each (Rs.50,000 X 2= Rs.1,00,000/-) in the name of the opposite party No.2, payable at a Bank where banking is convenient for the opposite party No.2. Out of the two fixed deposits, one shall be fixed for a maturity period of 3 years and one for 5 years term. The balance amount shall be released to the opposite party No.2 on being duly identified by her learned counsel.

¶42

Accordingly, this IA is allowed.

¶43

JUDGE

¶44

Comparing Assistant

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., v. Narayan Wary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., v. Narayan Wary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Kumar Sanyal and 2 Ors. Vs Naba Kanta Bordoloi

On the Death of Ibrahim Ali Barbhuiya His Legal Heirs Atiqur Rahman Borbhuiya and 16 Ors. Vs Musstt Rustana Begum and 12 Ors.

The Union of India Vs M/S Shree Gopal Enterprises

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Lalbhanu Nessa and 8 Ors.

Seema Prasad Vs Bidyut Saha and 7 Ors.

Union of India Vs Smti Sweety Kumari