Afazuddin Ahmed Vs MD Rabiul Ali and 2 Ors.

2:UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. BIJOYNAGAR BRANCH REPRESENTED BY DIVISIONAL MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. DIVISION-II BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI-5

¶12

G.S. ROAD

¶13

POLICY NO. 130202/3106/02/00006403 VALID UP TO 14.02.2008 IN RESPECT OF VEHICLE BEARING NUMBER AS - 01-J-9792

¶14

3:REGIONAL MANAGER

¶15

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. BHANGAGARH

¶16

Deepjyoti Digitally signed by Deepjyoti Sarkar Sarkar Date: 2026.02.10 12:27:59 +05'30'

¶17

GUWAHATI-5 G.S. ROAD POLICY NO. 530902/31/06/01/00007/785 VALID UP TO 12-12-2007 IN RESPECT OF VEHICLE AS 01/N-3985 MOTOR CYCL

¶18

Page No.# 2/8

¶19

Advocate for the appellant	:Mr. N.D. Bhuyan
Advocate for the respondents	:Ms. R.D. Mozumdar, for R-2; Mr. R.C. Paul, for R-3.
Date on which judgment is reserved	:N/A
Date of pronouncement of judgment	: 05.02.2026
Whether the pronouncement is of the operative part of the judgment?	:N/A
Whether the full judgment has been pronounced?	:Yes

¶20

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

¶21

JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)

¶22

Heard Mr. N.D. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Ms. R.D. Mozumdar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2; and Mr. R.C. Paul, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3. None appears for the respondent No. 1.

¶23

2. This appeal, under Section 173 of the M.V. Act, 1988, is directed against the judgment and award, dated 21.07.2015, passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nalbari, in MAC Case No. 9/2008.

¶24

3. It is to be noted here that vide impugned judgment and award, dated 21.07.2015, the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nalbari (‘Tribunal’, for short) had directed the respondent No. 2/United India Insurance Company Limited to pay a sum of Rs. 2,72,000/-, being the compensation, to the appellant/claimant, within 60 days from the date of award, and also directed that in the event of failing to pay the same, the amount will carry

¶25

Page No.# 3/8

¶26

interest @ 6% per annum, which would be calculated from the date of award till final payment.

¶27

4. The background facts, leading to filing of the present appeal, are briefly stated as under:

¶28

“On 01.05.2007, at about 3 p.m., Md. Afazuddin Ahmed, the appellant/claimant, was standing on the left side of the road, then suddenly one Auto Rickshaw, bearing Registration No. AS-01-J-9792, driven in a rash and negligent manner, knocked him down from the front side. As a result, Afazuddin Ahmed had sustained serious injuries on his person. He was taken to Azara Primary Health Centre, from where he was referred to Gauhati Medical College and Hospital. After two days of treatment at Gauhati Medical College and Hospital, he was shifted to Popular Nursing Home, Patna by his family members and admitted there on 06.05.2007. During the course of treatment at Patna, he had to undergo several operations. And because of the injuries suffered by him, he became disabled. In connection with the accident, one FIR was also lodged with the police, upon which Azara P.S. Case No. 135/07, under Sections 279/338/427 IPC was registered against the driver of the offending vehicle, which was insured with the United India Insurance Company Limited, the respondent No. 2 herein, and the vehicle had a valid insurance coverage at the relevant time.

¶29

Thereafter, Afazuddin Ahmed/appellant had instituted one claim petition, seeking compensation amounting to Rs. 14,00,000/-. During the pendency of the said claim petition, the appellant had also filed an amendment claim petition impleading himself as opposite party No. 3, being the owner and driver of the vehicle, bearing Registration No. AS-01-

¶30

Page No.# 4/8

¶31

N-3985, and also impleaded the New India Assurance Company Limited, the insurer of his vehicle, being the opposite party No. 4. The respondents/opposite parties had filed their written statement denying their liabilities.

¶32

Thereafter, taking evidence of the claimant and his witnesses and after hearing learned counsel for both the parties, the learned Tribunal, vide impugned judgment and award dated 21.07.2015, had assessed the compensation, which the appellant is entitled to, at Rs. 3,30,000/-.

¶33

Having assessed the compensation at Rs. 3,30,000/-, the learned Tribunal had directed that 10% of the aforesaid amount shall be deducted on account of contributory negligence, on the part of the claimant/appellant and directed that a sum of Rs. 2,97,000/- shall be paid to the appellant/claimant deducting the amount i.e. Rs.25,000/ which has already been paid to the appellant/claimant as interim compensation. It was further provided that the opposite party No. 2, i.e. the respondent No. 2 herein, shall pay the amount of Rs. 2,72,000/- within a period of 60 days from the date of award i.e. 21.07.2015, and in the event of failing to pay the same within the period of 60 days, the amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of award till realization.

¶34

5. Being aggrieved, the appellant/claimant has preferred this present appeal, primarily on two grounds:-

¶35

(i) The learned Tribunal, while assessing the compensation, has failed to take note of the expenditure statement submitted by the claimant for arriving at a just and reasonable compensation;

¶36

Page No.# 5/8

¶37

(ii) The learned Tribunal has failed to award any interest from the date of filing of the claim petition.

¶38

6. Mr. Bhuyan, the learned counsel for the appellant/claimant submits that while assessing the compensation at Rs. 3,30,000/-, in the impugned judgment and award, the learned Tribunal has failed to award adequate compensation under the head of medical expenses. Mr. Bhuyan also submits that though some of the vouchers could not be produced at the time of hearing before the learned Tribunal, yet essentiality Certificate was produced for the same, however, the learned Tribunal had failed to consider it. Mr. Bhuyan further submits that the learned Tribunal has also failed to award interest upon the compensation amount from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e. from 21.01.2008.

¶39

6.1. While the matter was extensively heard on 08.01.2026, a question was put to Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the appellant, as to whether on the basis of Essentiality Certificate, without the same being supported by any voucher, the compensation can be assessed under the head of medical expenses; then Mr. Bhuyan submitted that he may be granted some time to go into the said aspect, and accordingly the matter is listed today i.e. 05.02.2026.

¶40

6.2. Today, Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is not inclined to pursue the point of awarding adequate compensation under the head of medical expenses. However, he submits that now this Court has to decide the point of entitlement of interest only, by this appellant.

¶41

7. Ms. Mozumdar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2/ United India Insurance Company Limited submits that the respondent No. 2 has already paid the amount to the appellant/claimant on 10.03.2016, however, without the interest as directed by the learned Tribunal, @ 6% per annum in the event of

¶42

Page No.# 6/8

¶43

failing to pay the amount of compensation i.e. Rs. 2,72,000/-, within the period of 60 days from 21.07.2015. She also fairly submits that the learned Tribunal has not awarded any interest upon the aforementioned amount of compensation, and as such, no amount was paid. Under such circumstances, she submits that this appeal may be disposed of by granting interest only.

¶44

8. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the memo of the appeal and the grounds mentioned therein, and also gone through the impugned judgment and award dated 21.07.2015, and the record received from the learned Tribunal.

¶45

9. Since Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the appellant is only pressing upon granting interest to the appellant, this Court is inclined to confine its discussion only on the point of interest.

¶46

10. Indisputably, while awarding the compensation, the learned Tribunal has not awarded any interest upon the assessed amount from the date of filing of the claim petition or from the date of filing of the evidence-on-affidavit. Also, indisputably, the amount of compensation i.e. Rs. 2,72,000/- was paid on 10.03.2016, though the judgment and award was passed on 21.07.2015. Further, the amount was not paid within the period of 60 days, and as such, the appellant is entitled to interest @ 6% per annum, as directed by the learned Tribunal, from 21.07.2015 till the date of payment i.e. 10.03.2016.

¶47

11. It also appears that the claim petition was filed before the learned Tribunal on 21.01.2008. The learned Tribunal has dispose of claim petition on 21.07.2015. However, the learned Tribunal has not awarded any interest upon the compensation amount, so awarded vide judgment and award dated 21.07.2015.

¶48

Page No.# 7/8

¶49

11.1. It is to be noted here that Section 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, allows a claim Tribunal to award simple interest on compensation claims from the date of filing until payment is made. This awarding of interest on compensation in motor accident cases serves several important reasons. One of such reason is it compensates claimants for the delay in receiving their compensation, ensuring they are not disadvantaged by the lengthy legal process. Another reason is equitable consideration i.e. interest is awarded to ensure that claimants receive fair compensation for the time they had to wait for justice. One more reason is interest is paid as incentive for timely payment, which ensures that insurance companies and other parties liable for payment of compensation pays the same as soon as practicable.

¶50

11.2. Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Niru @ Niharika & Ors. , reported in 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 693 , while dealing with payment of interest upon the compensation, has held as under:-

¶51

“ 11. In fact, it is due to the repudiation of or refusal to consider the claim that the claimants are driven to the Tribunal. When the matter is pending before the Tribunal or in appeal before the higher forums, the claimants are deprived of the compensation for future prospects. If they are paid in time, it could be utilized by the claimants and on failure, the loss of dependency would force the claimants to source their livelihood from elsewhere. This is sought to be compensated at least minimally by award of interest, which oftener them ever is nominal also since only simple interest is awarded. If the amounts were disbursed to the claimants on a rough calculation, on intimation of the accident to the Insurance Company, subject to the award of the Tribunal,

¶52

Page No.# 8/8

¶53

necessarily there would not have been any interest liability at least to the extent of the disbursement made.”

¶54

11.3. As discussed herein above the learned Tribunal has not awarded any interest from the date of filing of the claim petition. What the learned Tribunal has awarded was interest @ 6% per annum to the appellant/claimant from the date of award i.e. 21.07.2015, till final payment. Indisputable, the payment was made by the respondent No.2 on 10.03.2016, and admittedly, without paying interest as ordered by the learned Tribunal.

¶55

11.4. Thus, keeping in mind the object behind awarding of interest as discussed herein above and also considering the provision of Section 171 of the M.V. Act, 1988 and also the ratio laid down in the case of Niru @ Niharika (supra), it is provided that the respondent No. 2/United Insurance Company Limited shall pay the interest @ 9% per annum, to the appellant/claimant from the date of filing of the claim petition till 10.03.2016.

¶56

12. The respondent No. 2 shall pay the said amount directly in the account of the appellant by NEFT/RTGS whichever is convenient to it, within a period of two months from today.

¶57

13. In terms of above, this appeal stands disposed of leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

¶58

14. Send down the records of the learned Tribunal, along with a copy of this judgment and order.

¶59

JUDGE

¶60

Comparing Assistant

Afazuddin Ahmed v. MD Rabiul Ali and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Afazuddin Ahmed v. MD Rabiul Ali and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M Tec Innovations Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Narayan Konwar, IAS Vs Smti Rubi Goswami

Smti Rubi Goswami Vs Dr Ravi Kota IAS and 5 Ors.

Shree Prakash Singh Vs Trishit Dhar

Sushil Agarwal Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Dilowara Begum and 5 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 10 Ors.