Ms National Insurance Company Limited through Divisional Manager Vs Sita Devi

2025:JHHC:36355

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI M. A. No.357 of 2019

M/s National Insurance Co. Ltd., through Divisional Manager, B.P. Agarwalla Building, Dhansar, Dhanbad through Assistant Manager, Jharkhand Legal Cell, at Kachahri Road, Beside Gopal Complex, Ranchi, PO- GPO, PS- Kotwali, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶4

.... .. ... Appellant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

Sita Devi, W/o Lallu Singh

¶7

Lalu Singh, S/o Late Bhola Nath Singh Both R/o Officers Colony, Luby Circular Road, PO & PS- Dhanbad, District- Dhanbad (Jharkhand).

¶8

Smt. Binapani Chatterjee, W/o Late K. C. Chatterjee, C/o S. P. Chatterjee, R/o Village- Jemari, PO and PS- J. K. Nagar, DistrictBurdwan (West Bengal). .. ... ...Respondent(s)

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶10

For the Appellant (s) : Mr. Amaresh Kumar, Advocate For the Resp.1 : Mr. A. K. Sahani, Advocate

¶11

04/ 03.12.2025 . Heard, learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

The appellant- M/s National Insurance Co. Ltd. is in appeal against the judgment /Award of compensation dated 01.05.2019 passed by learned Principal District Judge- cum- Presiding Officer, MACT, Dhanbad, in M.A.C.C. Case No.85 of 2011 in which compensation has been awarded under Section 166 of the M. V. Act on the insurer of the Truck bearing Registration No.WMH -5334 for the death of the driver of Scorpio bearing Registration No.JH 10R- 8201 which rammed into the stationary truck.

¶13

The learned Tribunal recorded a finding that the truck had previously met with an accident involving an ambulance, and thereafter it was seized by the police and left parked on the road without any tail-light or adequate warning signal for approaching vehicles. It further held that the Scorpio was being driven at a high speed and was, therefore, partly responsible for the accident. Accordingly, under Issue No. (iv) of the impugned judgment, the Court concluded that there was contributory negligence to the extent of 50% on the part of the truck.

¶14

It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant- Insurance Company that there was no negligence on the part of the owner of the truck, as after the accident it was in the seized by the Police and was parked by the side of the road when the accident took place. It has also come in the evidence that boulders were put in-front of parked truck to ward off any accident.

¶15

2025:JHHC:36355

¶16

Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the Award of compensation as awarded by the learned Tribunal has already been deposited before the learned Tribunal.

¶17

This Court is of the view that merely because the said stationary truck had earlier met with an accident and was seized by the Police, it did not absolve the driver of the responsibility to put sufficient tail light or marks so that approaching vehicles got sufficient notice about the stationary vehicle. In absence of any such material to show that reasonable care and caution was exercised while parking the vehicle, I do not find any infirmity in apportioning 50% contributory negligence on the part of the driver of the said Truck.

¶18

There is no infirmity in the impugned judgment /Award of compensation, as such, the appeal being devoid of merit stands dismissed.

¶19

In view of the submission that the Award of compensation has already been deposited before the learned Tribunal, Office is directed to refund the statutory amount deposited at the time of preferring the instant Misc. Appeal to the appellant- Insurance Company at once. Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.

¶20

( Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J. )

¶21

Sandeep/-

¶22

Uploaded 5.12.2025.

Ms National Insurance Company Limited through Divisional Manager v. Sita Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms National Insurance Company Limited through Divisional Manager v. Sita Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Munni Devi Vs Ms Balaji Processing Works in Charge Adarsh Kumar

The State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner Vs Om Prakash Mital

Devanti Devi Alias Hewanti Devi Vs Om Prakash Singh

Rukmani Devi Vs Ranthi Khariyain

National Insurance Company Limited through Divisional Manager Vs Sampa Mandal

National Insurance Company Limited through Divisional Manager Vs Smt Aloka Nanda Sarkar