The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Represented through Its Sr Divisional Manager Vs Shakuna Devi and Ors.

2025:JHHC:28243

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Misc. Appeal No.53 of 2015

------

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Tiwary Enclave, 35A Circular Road, Lalpur, P.O. and P.S. Lalpur, Ranchi represented through its Sr. Divisional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., P.O. and P.S. Lalpur, District Ranchi .... .... …. Appellant

¶5

Shakuna Devi, wife of Manohar Bhuiyan, resident of Village Pandakhap, P.O. and P.S. Sadar, District Chatra

¶6

Mushi Sao, son of Dukhan Sao, resident of Village Pitez, P.O. and P.S. Itkhori, District Chatra

¶7

Manohar Bhuiyan, son of Late Bisun Bhuiyan

¶8

Malti Kumari, daughter of Manohar Bhuiyan

¶9

Ajay Kumar, son of Manohar Bhuiyan

¶10

Punam Kumari, daughter of Manohar Bhuiyan

¶11

Respondent Nos.4 – 6 are minor and repugnant through their father, natural guardian (respondent no.3), all residents of Village Pandakhap, P.O. and P.S. Sadar, District Chatra

¶12

.... .... .... Respondents

¶13

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶14

For the Appellant : Mr. G.C. Jha, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Vijay Kumar Sharma, Advocate ------

¶15

Order No. 22/ Dated : 15.09.2025

¶16

Appellant is the Insurance Company and is before this Court against the judgment of award and compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal in Claim Case No.60/2010, whereby and whereunder the liability to pay compensation has been fixed on the Insurance Company.

¶17

Factum of accident or the insurance is not in dispute.

¶18

Appeal is preferred mainly on the ground that it was the offending vehicle Mahindra Safari, which was a commercial vehicle with a passenger capacity of ten persons and was plying without any valid permit which was a breach of terms of insurance policy under Section 149 of the Motor Vehicle Act. This plea was raised before the learned Tribunal however, the same has been brushed aside by only stating that in a vehicle with 9 + 1 including passenger capacity, permit was not required.

¶19

It is further submitted that it was issue of a vehicle with 18 seating

¶20

1

¶21

2025:JHHC:28243

¶22

capacity and from the registration certificate, which is Exhibit X/1, it will be evident that capacity of offending vehicle was of 10 passengers.

¶23

Earlier notice was issued on the owner of the vehicle which has been validly served, but none had appeared consequently, the appeal is being heard ex-parte against the owner. Claimant has appeared and contested the claim.

¶24

Having considered the submissions advanced, it is evident from Section 66(4) of the Motor Vehicle Act that the State Government may frame Rule under Section 96 for requirement of permit with respect to motor vehicles adapted to carry more than 09 persons excluding the driver. Here, from the registration certificate, it is evident that passenger capacity was 10 including the driver. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity so far in the order passed by the learned Tribunal where liability has been fixed on the Insurance Company to pay compensation amount.

¶25

Miscellaneous Appeal accordingly, dismissed . Interlocutory Application, if any, is disposed of.

¶26

Statutory amount deposited at the time of filing of appeal, be remitted to the learned Tribunal being disbursed to the claimants for adjusting the said amount from the final compensation amount.

¶27

It is submitted by the learned counsel on behalf of Insurance Company that Rs.5,00,000/- has already been paid vide order dated 22.06.2017 passed by this Court which has not been disputed by the learned counsel on behalf of claimant, which will be adjusted from the final compensation amount and the remaining amount to be paid within four weeks of the order.

¶28

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶29

15.09.2025 Anit

¶30

2

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Represented through Its Sr Divisional Manager v. Shakuna Devi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Represented through Its Sr Divisional Manager v. Shakuna 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dharamraj Singh Vs Ram Pravesh Singh

Pawan Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Neelam Kumari Vs Nehal Khan

Rajesh Kant Sinha Vs Pradeep Kumar Agrawal

Upendra Nath Mishra Vs Smt Nandni Singh

Renu Choubey Vs Ritesh Abhinav