Dismissed

Tthe National Ins. Co. Ltd. v. Gita Rudrapaul and 5 Ors.

Tripura HC12 Jun 2017MAC App./76/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Chief Justice held the appeal filed by the insurance company as noticee was not maintainable for lack of locus-standi to question the tribunal's award quantum under the Motor Vehicles Act. The appeal was dismissed, and the insurer was directed to deposit the remaining award amount with interest.

What did the court decide?

Appellant directed to deposit the remaining amount of the award with interest within two months.

Tthe National Ins. Co. Ltd. Vs Gita Rudrapaul and 5 Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Tripura HC (2017)

¶1

MAC App. No.76/2013

¶2

BEFORE

¶3

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. T. VAIPHEI

¶4

Present:

¶5

For the appellant : Mr. P. Gautam, Adv. For the respondents : Ms. S. Deb Gupta, Adv.

¶6

12.06.2017.

¶7

Heard Mr. P. Gautam, the learned counsel for the appellant-insurance company and Ms. S. Deb Gupta, the learned counsel for the claimant-respondents.

¶8

At the outset, Ms. S. Deb Gupta raises preliminary objection on the maintainability of the appeal as the appellant is only the noticee and not party to the claim petition. In support of this contention the learned counsel for the claimant-respondents draws my attention to the judgment dated 04.09.2013 passed by this Court in MAC Appeal No.74 of 2013.

¶9

This Court in the aforesaid judgment has made the

¶10

following observations :

¶11

“14. A conjoint reading of the principles as laid down in Shila Datta (supra) and Rekha Jain (supra) it would eminently transpire that the insurer as the noticee has no locus-standi to challenge the award passed by the tribunal on questioning its legality inasmuch as the noticee does not have that status to carry out an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act beyond the grounds those would flow from Section 149(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act. Apart that, if on the premises as provided under Section 170(b) of the Motor Vehicles Act, the insurer is not provided with leave by the tribunal for resorting to all the defences as available to the owner of the vehicle or the driver, the insurer even as the party cannot resort to all such defences as available to the owner/driver. Indubitably in this case, the appellant is simply a noticee. Thus, in view of Shila Datta (supra) the appellant does not have any locus-standi to carry out this appeal on questioning the quantum either directly or by implications and accordingly, this appeal fails and is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.”

¶12

MAC App. No.76/2013

¶13

Page 1 of 2

¶14

In the light of the above observation of this Court, there is force in the contention of the learned counsel for the claimant-respondents. The appeal is, therefore, not maintainable.

¶15

The insurer is directed to deposit the remaining amount of the award with interest within 2(two) months from today. Needless to say, any amount already deposited or paid shall be adjusted accordingly.

¶16

It is made clear that as and when the aforesaid amount is deposited, the same shall be released to the claimantrespondents as per usual arrangements without further reference from this Court.

¶17

Send down the LCR forthwith.

¶18

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶19

d.dey.

¶20

MAC App. No.76/2013

¶21

Page 2 of 2

Tthe National Ins. Co. Ltd. v. Gita Rudrapaul and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tthe National Ins. Co. Ltd. v. Gita Rudrapaul and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Moumita Ray Vs Satyaki Paul Choudhury

Biplab Singha Roy Vs The State Of Tripura

Manidipa Laskar on Behalf of Accd. Litan Sarkar Vs the State of Tripura

Shadir Miah Vs Utsawmoy Dey

Krishna Das Vs The State Of Tripura

Rakhi Das Vs The State Of Tripura