United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Padma Devi And Ors.

The present interlocutory application has been filed by the appellantInsurance Company for condoning the delay of 90 days in filing the present miscellaneous appeal.

¶19

Considering the reasons assigned in the present interlocutory application, the same is hereby, allowed and the delay of 90 days in filing the present miscellaneous appeal is hereby condoned.

¶20

Accordingly, I.A. No.9328 of 2017 is hereby, allowed and disposed of.

¶21

M.A. No.546 of 2017

¶22

Heard the parties.

¶23

2. The present miscellaneous appeal has been filed by the appellant-Insurance Company against the Judgment dated 18.03.2017, passed by the learned District Judge-III-cum-Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Deoghar, in Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Case No.34 of 2009. On death, compensation amount of Rs.5,90,000/- has been awarded to the claimants.

¶24

3. It appears that the deceased was aged about 34 years and number of dependants are four.

¶25

4. Referring to the paragraph No.15 of the impugned Judgment, it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company that the

¶26

gratuitous labourer word has used by the Tribunal, which suggest that the Insurance Company is not liable to indemnify the owner of the offending vehicle. Further, it has been submitted that towards the future prospect instead of 40%, only 50% have been granted. Under the conventional head, some more amount has been paid. The interest of 9% per annum should also be reduced.

¶27

5. Learned counsel for the claimants has submitted that there is no such issue framed “ whether the deceased was a gratuitous passenger or not ?”

¶28

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the records, it appears that neither any such issue has been raised, nor has been framed in the concerned Tribunal and as such, the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company is not tenable. Accordingly, it is hereby, rejected.

¶29

So far as quantum of compensation is concerned, it is a meagre amount i.e., Rs.5,90,000/- which has been paid to the claimants of the deceased, aged about 34 years. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same. Accordingly, the prayer for appellant-Insurance Company is hereby, rejected.

¶30

The statutory amount shall be remitted to the Tribunal for release of the same either in favour of the claimants or the Insurance Company depending upon the factual matrix of the case.

¶31

In view of the disposal of the present miscellaneous appeal, pending interlocutory applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶32

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶33

Raja/Uploaded

¶34

Page | 2

¶35

M.A. No.546 of 2017

United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Padma Devi And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Padma Devi And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

MD Sarfaraz Alam Vs the State of Jharkhand

Devashish Mohanty Alias Debashish Mohanty Alias Gopal Vs the State of Jharkhand

X Vs State of Jharkhand

Anil Kumar Tiwari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sarju Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner Dhanbad

Milan Devi Vs Harivansh