National Insurance Company Limited through Assistant Manager Jharkhand Legal Cell v. Makhi Jerai Alias Manki Jerai

Jharkhand HC5 Apr 2023MA/4/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal challenged a District Judge's award in a motor accident case. The Court allowed the appeal and modified the operative portion to explicitly grant the appellant-insurance company the liberty to recover compensation from the vehicle owner via execution.

What did the court decide?

The impugned judgment and award were modified to confer liberty upon the appellant-insurance company to recover the amount paid from the vehicle owner via execution.

National Insurance Company Limited through… — Execution and Attachment | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

M.A. No. 4 of 2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI M.A. No.4 of 2021

¶4

National Insurance Company Limited, Chaibasa Branch, Amlatola Chaibasa (Near Telephone Exchange), P.O. & P.S. –Chaibasa, District – Singhbhum West, through Assistant Manager, Jharkhand Legal Cell, Office at Kachahri Road beside Gopal Complex, Ranchi, P.O-G.P.O, P.S. – Kotwali, District –Ranchi, (Jharkhand)

¶5

.... .... …. Opp.Party No.3/Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Makhi Jerai @ Manki Jerai, aged about 47 years, wife of Late Jaipal Jerai,

¶8

Kuni Mai Jerai, aged about 21 years, daughter of Late Jaipal Jerai, Both residents of Village –Junginanda, P.O. –Siyaljoda, P.S. – Jagannathpur, District –Singhbhum West, (Jharkhand)

¶9

.... .... …. Applicants/Respondents

¶10

Mangal Singh Tiriya, son of Arjun Tiriya, resident of Village – Chandipee, P.O. –Noagaon, Jhinkpani, P.S. –Jhinkpani, District – Singhbhum West (Jharkhand), (Owner of offending vehicle bearing Reg. No. JH-06C-9899)

¶11

.... .... …. Opp. Party no.1/Respondent

¶12

Munna Tiriya, son of Son Ram Tiriya, resident of Village –Kudahatu, Tola –Sorposai, P.O. & P.S. –Jagnnathpur, District –Singhbhum West (Jharkhand), (Driver of offending vehicle bearing Reg. No. JH-06C9899

¶13

.... .... …. Opp. Party no.2/Respondent ------ For the Appellants : Mr. Amaresh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent No.1 : Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 : None

¶14

P R E S E N T

¶15

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶16

------

¶17

By the Court:-

¶18

Heard the parties.

¶19

Though notice has validly been served upon the respondent nos. 2 to 4 but no-one turns up on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 to 4 in-spite of repeated calls. Hence, this appeal is heard ex-parte against the respondent nos.2 to 4.

¶20

This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 against the judgment and award dated 21.03.2020 passed by the District Judge-II-cum-Presiding Officer, Motor Accident

¶21

¶22

M.A. No. 4 of 2021

¶23

Claims Tribunal, Chaibasa (West Singhbhum) in M.A.C. Case No. 58 of 2015 by which the learned tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.4,83,600/- along with simple interest @ 7% per annum from the date of admission of the claim application i.e. 07.01.2017 till its realization and the opposite party no.3-appellant –insurance company has been directed to pay the compensation amount but though in the internal page no.15-16 of the impugned judgment and award, the learned tribunal has given the right to the appellant–insurance company to recover the compensation amount paid by the insurance company to the claimant-respondent no.1, still in the operative portion of the judgment and award, the same has not been mentioned by the tribunal.

¶24

Mr. Amaresh Kumar, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that though the appellant has raised several grounds but the appellant abandons all the grounds and confines to the only ground that the impugned judgment and award by modified by giving the liberty to the appellant –insurance company to recover the amount of compensation paid by it to the claimants from the opposite party no.1 –owner of the vehicle; by filing execution petition, in respect of which there is finding of the tribunal also but the learned tribunal has failed to mention the same in the operative portion of the judgment and award.

¶25

Mr. Anjani Kumar, the learned counsel for the respondent no.1 has no objection to the prayer of the appellant.

¶26

Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials in the record, the only point to be

¶27

¶28

M.A. No. 4 of 2021

¶29

determined in this appeal is:-

¶30

“Whether the operative portion of the award is to be modified by giving the liberty to the appellant-insurance company to recover the amount paid by it to the claimantrespondent no.1 from the opposite party no.1 –owner of the vehicle?”

¶31

Perusal of the record reveals that consequent upon the failure of the opposite party no.1 to produce the driving license and the permit of the offending vehicle in-spite of the contrary pleading of the opposite party no.3 –appellant –insurance company, in internal page nos. 15-16 of the impugned judgment and award, the learned tribunal has come to the conclusion that the opposite party no.3 – appellant –National Insurance Company Ltd. will be at liberty to recover the amount paid by it to claimant-respondent no.1 by filing an execution petition but inadvertently, the same has not been mentioned in the operative portion of the impugned judgment and award.

¶32

Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court has no hesitation in holding that this is a fit case where the learned tribunal ought to have mentioned in the operative portion of the impugned judgment and award as well that the appellant –insurance company has been conferred with the liberty to recover the amount paid by it to the claimant-respondent no.1 from the opposite party no.1 –owner of the vehicle by way of execution of the award. Accordingly, the sole point for determination is answered in the affirmative.

¶33

In view of the discussions made above, the impugned judgment and award is modified by conferring the liberty upon the

¶34

¶35

M.A. No. 4 of 2021

¶36

opposite party no.3–appellant -insurance company to recover the amount paid by it to the claimant-respondent no.1 in terms of the award from the opposite party no.1-owner of the vehicle by way of execution of the award.

¶37

This appeal is disposed of with the modification of the impugned judgment and award to the aforesaid extent only.

¶38

The Registrar General of this Court is directed to transmit the statutory amount, if any, deposited by the appellant-insurance company to the concerned tribunal.

¶39

Let a copy of this Judgment along with Lower Court Records be sent back to the learned court below concerned forthwith.

¶40

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶41

High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 5^th April, 2023 AFR/ Sonu-Gunjan/-

National Insurance Company Limited through Assistant Manager Jharkhand Legal Cell v. Makhi Jerai Alias Manki Jerai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

National Insurance Company Limited through Assistant Manager Jharkhand Legal Cell v. Makhi Jerai Alias Manki Jerai

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

Abhishek Kumar Singh Alias Abhishek Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jiten Hiralal Somya Alias Jatin Harilal Somaiya Vs the State of Jharkhand

Tanmoy Sen Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ashish Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Manik Lal Ghosh Vs Ramu Sarkar And Ors.

Sr Branch Manager National Insurance Co. Ltd. Represented through Its Assistant Manager Vs Anjor Tete