Disposed

Sashanka Brahma v. the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Gauhati HC5 Sept 2024WP(C)/4457/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought cancellation of his vehicle's registration after it was severely damaged in an accident, contending the Insurance Company had reported the damage. The State argued the owner's own obligation under Section 55 remained unfulfilled. The Court directed the petitioner to submit a report application, after which the registering authority would act and pass a speaking order.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sashanka Brahma Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010179752024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/4457/2024

¶5

SASHANKA BRAHMA

¶6

S/O- LATE UTTAM CH. BRAHMA, R/O- VILL- DAHALAPARA, P.O. KHAGRABARI, P.S. KAJALGAON, DIST.- CHIRANG (BTAD), ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006

¶9

2:THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER BETKUCHI GUWAHATI- 781034 DIST.- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM

¶10

3:NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY DIVISIONAL IN-CHARGE GUWAHATI REGIONAL OFFICE G.S.ROAD BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI- 78100

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S BORTHAKUR, MS. P BORAH

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, ASSAM,

¶13

Page No.# 2/3

¶14

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

¶15

ORDER

¶16

06-09-2024

¶17

Heard Shri S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. D. Borah, learned Standing Counsel, Transport Department.

¶18

Considering the subject matter in dispute and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at the motion stage.

¶19

The instant petition has been filed with the grievance that the Regional Transport Officer, Kamrup (M) has not taken any steps for cancellation of the Registration Certificate of the vehicle of the petitioner. It is projected that a vehicle (HYUNDAI CRETA) bearing Registration No. AS-01 EA-6935 owned by the petitioner had fallen into a canal on 20.07.2023 and was severely damaged. The matter was enquired by the Insurance Company and the IRDAI had issued a report regarding the permanent damage of the vehicle in question and the Insurance Company had also issued a letter to the RTO for cancellation of the registration.

¶20

Shri Borthakur, the learned counsel has submitted that the requirement of Section 55 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is substantially complied with as the report has already been forwarded by the Insurance Company.

¶21

Ms. Borah, the learned Standing Counsel has however submitted that under Section 55, there is a requirement and obligation on the part of the owner to report the fact to the Registering Authority regarding the damage of the vehicle or that it has been rendered permanently incapable of use. In this regard, the learned Standing Counsel has placed before this Court written

¶22

Page No.# 3/3

¶23

instructions with a forwarding letter dated 31.08.2024 as per which it transpires that the petitioner owner has not fulfilled his part of the obligation under Section 55. The learned Standing Counsel has also informed that the communication alleged to have been sent by the Insurance Company has not been received till now.

¶24

Considering the facts and circumstances and the respective contentions, this Court is of the opinion that interest of justice would be served by directing the petitioner to submit an application reporting the fact regarding damage of the vehicle along with the report of the Insurance Company whereafter the authority envisaged under Section 55 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 would take necessary action and pass a speaking order.

¶25

Writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

¶26

Copy of the written instructions placed by Ms. Borah, the learned Standing Counsel is made part of the records.

¶27

Comparing Assistant

Sashanka Brahma v. the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sashanka Brahma v. the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Edifice Engineering and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Kohinoor Pulp and Paper Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assam Industrial Development Corporation Limited and Anr.

Kohinoor Pulp and Paper Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assam Industrial Development Corporation Limited and Anr. F

Laipuli Samabai Samity Ltd. and 21 Ors. Vs Ananda Kumar Das

Abul Kashem Miah Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Union of India and Anr. Vs Sujit Nunia and 7 Ors.