Allowed

Cholamandalm Ms General Insurance Company Limited v. Smti Ponali Narah Alias Sonali Narah

Gauhati HC15 Sept 2026I.A.(Civil)/129/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of an interlocutory application seeking a stay of execution of a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award. The Interimstay trial allowed a partial deposit of 50% by the insurer before the main appeal hearing.

What did the court decide?

Executive of the MAC award is stayed pending appeal; applicant must deposit 50% of awarded amount and court to disburse to claimants upon furnishing indemnity bond.

Cholamandalm Ms General Insurance Company Limited… — Execution and Attachment | Gauhati HC (2026)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010214902025

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/129/2026

¶5

CHOLAMANDALM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AND HEAD OFFICE AT SHAW WALLACE BUILDING NEW NO. 319 OLD N. 154 2ND FLOOR THAMBU CHETRY CHENNAI PIN 600001 INDIA ITS ZONAL OFFICE AT OFFICE NO. 201 AND 202 L AND T CHAMBERS 2ND FLOOR 16 CAMAC STREET KOLKATA 700017 AND ITS GUWAHATI REGIONAL OFFICE AT 4TH FLOOR AASTHA PLAZA BORA SERVICE G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI KAMRUP (M) ASSAM 781007 REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY MANAGER LEGAL CLAIMS OF GUWAHATI REGIONAL OFFICE

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

SMTI PONALI NARAH ALIAS SONALI NARAH WIFE OF SRI DIPAK NARAH PERMANENT RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE PUTHIBIL POLICE STATION- NORTH LAKHIMPUR DISTRICT- LAKHIMPUR PIN CODE- 787001 ASSAM 2:SRI DIPAK NARAH SON OF LATE KAMAL NARAH

¶8

Page No.# 2/5

¶9

3:MISS BIJOYA NARAH DAUGHTER OF SRI DIPAK NARAH ALL ARE PERMANENT R/O VILL. PUTHIBIL P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST. LAKHIMPUR PIN 787001 ASSAM. 4:SRI RAJA MILI SON OF BITAL MILI RESIDENT OF AHOMONI POLICE STATION -NORTH LAKHIMPUR DISTRICTLAKHIMPUR PIN CODE- 787052. ASSAM. (OWNER OF VEHICLE AS-07-AC-4200 TRACTOR)

¶10

5:SRI BANAMALI DAS SON OF BIPUL DAS RESIDENT OF- CHECKBANDH POLICE STATION- NORTH LAKHIMPUR DISTRICT- LAKHIMPUR PIN CODE- 787001. ASSAM. (DRIVER OF VEHICLE AS-07-AC-4200 TRACTOR)

¶11

6:RAJA MILI S/O BITAL MILI R/O AHOMONI P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST. LAKHIMPUR PIN 787052 ASSAM.

¶12

7:BANAMALI DAS

¶13

S/O BIPUAL DAS R/O CHACKBANDHI P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST. LAKHIMPUR PIN 787001 ASSAM. -----------Advocate for : Tridib Kalita Advocate for : appearing for SMTI PONALI NARAH ALIAS SONALI NARAH

¶14

Page No.# 3/5

¶15

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Date : 16.09.2026

¶18

1. Heard Mr. T. Kalita, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. D. Mondal, learned counsel for the opposite party/claimants.

¶19

2. This interlocutory application has been filed by the applicant/Insurance Company under Order 41 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in connection with the connected MAC Appeal No. 21/2026, praying for stay of execution of the impugned judgment and award dated 03.05.2025, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 2, Kamrup (M), in MAC Case No. 565/2018 during the pendency of the MAC Appeal No. 21/2026.

¶20

3. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the aforesaid judgment and award has been impugned in the connected MAC Appeal No. 21/2026 and same has already been admitted. He further submits that the applicant/Insurance Company has challenged the finding of the Tribunal by which the Insurance Company was imposed the liability to pay the compensation, despite the fact that there are materials on record to indicate that the vehicle which was insured by the present applicant/Insurance Company was not involved in the accident. As such, he submits that the impugned judgment and award may be stayed during the pendency of the connected MAC appeal without any direction to deposit any amount by the applicant/Insurance Company.

¶21

4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the claimants/opposite party submits that he does not have any objection to grant of stay, provided the

¶22

Page No.# 4/5

¶23

Insurance Company is directed to deposit 50% of the awarded amount as a condition for grant of stay of execution of the impugned judgment.

¶24

5. He submits that though the applicant/Insurance Company, in the connected appeal, has taken the ground that the involvement of the vehicle which was insured by the present applicant/Insurance Company was not involved in the accident, however, materials on record shows that the chargesheet in the connected criminal case has been laid against the driver of the offending vehicle which was insured by the present applicant/Insurance Company.

¶25

6. He further submits that the claimants are ready to furnish an indemnity bond to ensure that in the event the appeal is allowed and the claimants are required to return back the money, they may do so.

¶26

7. After considering the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, this Court is of considered opinion that the rival contentions of the parties in the connected appeal shall have to consider while hearing the appeal finally. However, since the claim has been awarded in favor of the opposite parties/claimants, the interest of justice would be served if during the pendency of the connected appeal at least they are given 50% of the said amount with some conditions.

¶27

8. As such, this interlocutory application is allowed and the execution of the judgment and award dated 03.05.2025, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 2, Kamrup (M), in MAC Case No. 565/2018 shall remain stayed during the pendency of the connected MAC Appeal No. 21/2026, subject to deposit of 50% of the awarded amount by the applicant/Insurance Company

¶28

Page No.# 5/5

¶29

before the Registry of this Court within a period of six weeks from the date of this order.

¶30

9. On such deposit being made, same shall be disbursed by the Registry to the claimants/opposite party Nos. 1 and 2, after proper verification, subject to furnishing of an indemnity bond of amount equivalent to the amount which shall be so disbursed to them.

¶31

10. With above observation, this interlocutory application is disposed of.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Cholamandalm Ms General Insurance Company Limited v. Smti Ponali Narah Alias Sonali Narah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cholamandalm Ms General Insurance Company Limited v. Smti Ponali Narah Alias Sonali Narah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases