National Insurance Company Ltd. through Its Divisional Manager Represented through Its Asst Manager Vs Wasima Khatun and Ors.

2025:JHHC:33191

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI M. A. No. 67 of 2013

National Insurance Company Ltd., through its Divisional Manager at Hindustan Building, P.O. and P.S. Bistupur, Town Jamshedpur, District Singhbhum (East) represented through its Asst. Manager, Jharkhand Legal Cell, National Insurance Co. Ltd., S.N. Ganguly Road, Main Road, Ranchi, P-O- Ranchi, P-S- Kotwali, District Ranchi. .... .... Appellant

¶4

Versus

¶5

Wasima Khatun, wife of Md. Waris,

¶6

Sadam Hussain, son of Md. Waris,

¶7

Heena, daughter of Md. Waris,

¶8

Baby, daughter of Md. Waris, Respondent No. 2 to 4 are minor, represented through their mother and natural guardian Smt.-Wasima Khatoon All are resident-Gudri Market, Station Road, P.O. Tatanagar, P.S. Bagbera, Town-Jamshedpur, District-East Singhbhum

¶9

M/S Mahadeo Lal Nathmal, represented through its Manager at Jamshedpur at T-T-C-A-Office, Telco Works, P.O. Telco Works, P.S. Telco, Town - Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum

¶10

The Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company Ltd. through its General Manager, P-O and P.S. Telco, Town Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum… …. Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶12

For the Appellants :Mr. G.C. Jha, Advocate For the Resp. No. 1-4 :Ms. Adya Mishra, Advocate For the Resp. No. 6 :Mrs. Swati Shalini, Advocate

¶13

------

¶14

Order No. 19 / Dated : 04.11.2025.

¶15

Insurance Company is in appeal against the judgment and award of compensation in Case No. W.C. 2/ 2005 under Section 30 (1) (a) and (aa) of the Workmen’s (now employees) Compensation Act 1923, whereby and whereunder, a compensation of Rs.2,11,790/- has been allowed in favour of the claimants.

¶16

As per the case of the claimants, Md. Waris was driver since 1989 under opposite party no. 1/ respondent no. 5 who was registered transporter of TATA Chassis with opposite party no. 2. Md. Waris died in motor vehicle accident on 23.08.1993 when his truck met with an accident near Nagla, Padampur, Itawa in UP.

¶17

The deceased was 28 years old and was earning Rs.2000/- per month and the chassis was insured with the appellant-Insurance Company vide Policy No. 170 100/ 8600785/93. The learned Tribunal awarded a compensation and aggrieved by the said order, the instant appeal has been preferred by the

¶18

2025:JHHC:33191

¶19

Insurance Company.

¶20

It is argued by the learned counsel on behalf of the appellant that no such insurance policy was ever issued in favour of the owner of the vehicle. The sole ground for challenge of the award is that the vehicle was not under its insurance cover at the relevant time of accident.

¶21

From the impugned judgment and considering the materials on record, it is evident that the averment regarding the insurance has not been expressly denied in the show cause filed on behalf of the Insurance Company. In para 12 of the show cause Annexure-2, it has only been stated that applicant or owner of the vehicle has not submitted the copy of the insurance policy and the policy number in the claim petition was not correct. Beyond this, it has not been denied that the vehicle was not under its insurance cover, on the other hand, TATA Motors Limited-opposite party no. 2 in its show cause has specifically stated with the number of insurance policy that the said chassis was duly insured.

¶22

Furthermore, insurance claim form has also been filed which has been adduced into evidence and marked as Ext.4. In absence of any contrary pleading or evidence regarding the insurance of the vehicle, the instant appeal is devoid of any merit.

¶23

From the impugned award, it appears that the interest has been allowed at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of claim application which is enhanced to 12% per annum from the date of accident in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in P. Meenaraj Vs. P. Adigurusamy, {2022 0 Supreme (SC) 1305} .

¶24

With this modification, the instant appeal stands dismissed with cost. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.

¶25

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶26

Pawan / - Uploaded 07.11.2025

National Insurance Company Ltd. through Its Divisional Manager Represented through Its Asst Manager v. Wasima Khatun and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

National Insurance Company Ltd. through Its Divisional Manager Represented through Its Asst Manager v. Wasima Khatun and 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

Rajendra Singh Vs Usha Rakheja

Braj Mohan Singh Vs Suman Singh

Sri Nandlal Sahu Vs Hiralal Sahu

Sugriv Prasad Vs Ravi Shankar Kumar And Ors.

Bablu Barnwal Vs Niranjan Singh

Ujjwal Kumar Bit @ Ujjawal Bit Vs Subodh Kumar Das