Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 1]

Patna High Court

United India Insurance Company Ltd vs Anwari Khatoon & Ors on 13 October, 2017

Author: Prakash Chandra Jaiswal

Bench: Prakash Chandra Jaiswal

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

                      Miscellaneous Appeal No.550 of 2011
===========================================================
United India Insurance Company Limited, through its Divisional Manager,
Murarpur Road, P.S.-Kotwali, District-Gaya. Appeal and Appellant though the
Manager and Constituted Attorney, Regional Office, United India Insurance
Company Ltd. 3rd floor Chanakya Commercial complex, R'Block, Patna.
                                                              .... .... Appellant/s
                                     Versus
1. Anwari Khatoon W/o Lt. Ishrail Ansari.
2. Md. Asgar Ali S/o Lt. Ishrail Ansari.
3. Md. Aslam Ali S/o Lt. Ishrail Ansari.
4. Md. Arshad Ali S/o Lt. Ishrail Ansari.
All the above are R/o Village-Bahidganj (Sihuli), P.S. Amas, District-Gaya.
5. Sri Shadab S/o Sri Sahjad, R/o Mohalla-Ansarganj (Desidarwaja), PO/PS-
    Sikandrabad, District-Buland Sahar, (UP) {Owner of the Truck-UP-13G-
    13476}

                                                        .... .... Respondent/s
===========================================================
       Appearance :
       For the Appellant/s            : Mr. Durgesh Kumar Singh
       For the Respondent nos. 1 to 4 : Mr. Subhash Patel,
===========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA
JAISWAL
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 13-10-2017

                  Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned

   counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 4 on this Miscellaneous Appeal

   and perused the records.

                  No one turned up on behalf of the respondent no. 5,

   despite service of notice.

                  3. This Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the

   Order dated 29.04.2011 passed by F.T.C. IInd-cum-Motor Vehicle

   Accident Claim Tribunal, Gaya in M.A.C. Case no. 26 of 2010,

   whereby the learned Tribunal allowing the petition under Section
 Patna High Court MA No.550 of 2011 dt.13-10-2017

                                         2/4




        140 of the M.V. Act and directed the opposite party no. 1 (United

        India     Insurance       Company          Ltd.)   to   pay   the    ad   interim

        compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- to the claimants within

        three months from the order.

                         4. Factual matrix of the case is that the claimants filed

        M.A.C. Claim Case no. 26 of 2010 under Section 166 of the M.V.

        Act on account of death of the deceased Md. Ishrail Ansari in the

        motor vehicle accident with the case in succinct that on the fateful

        day the deceased Md. Ishrail Ansari was coming on his bicycle by

        left side of the road, suddenly a truck bearing registration no.

        UP13G-3476 being driven rashly and negligently in high speed by

        its driver arrived near him and dashed him. He sustained injuries in

        the said accident and ultimately died on the spot.                  Regarding the

        said accident, Amas P.S. Case no. 73 of 2003 was instituted under

        Sections 279, 304A of the Indian Penal Code. During the pendency

        of the aforesaid case, the claimants filed a petition under Section 140

        of the M.V. Act for awarding ad interim compensation to the tune of

        Rs. 50,000/-.

                        5. The opposite party no. 1 (United India Insurance

        Company Ltd.) filed rejoinder against the said petition and after

        hearing the parties and perusing the record, learned lower court

        passed the impugned order.
 Patna High Court MA No.550 of 2011 dt.13-10-2017

                                         3/4




                        6. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid

        order, the United India Insurance Company Ltd. has preferred the

        present appeal.

                        7. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

        appellant that the offending vehicle was not registered by the

        appellant and the cover note of the insurance policy filed by the

        claimants regarding the insurance of the said vehicle is fake. Hence,

        the appellant is not liable to pay any compensation to the claimants.

        The appellant has filed a petition dated 25.02.2011 in the court

        below to expunge it from the case on the aforesaid ground and the

        said petition is on record. But without considering the aforesaid

        petition and vital issue raised by the appellant, the learned Tribunal

        has passed the impugned order which is liable to be set aside.

                        8. On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned

        counsel for the respondents that the learned Tribunal has passed the

        impugned order considering the facts material available on record.

        Hence, it is liable to be upheld and this appeal has no substance in it

        and is liable to be dismissed.

                        9. From perusal of certified copy of the petition dated

        25.02.2011

filed by the appellant, it appears that by filing the said application before the Tribunal, appellant has raised the aforesaid plea of fake policy earlier to passing of the impugned order after Patna High Court MA No.550 of 2011 dt.13-10-2017 4/4 furnishing a copy of the same to the learned counsel for the claimants, but while passing the impugned order, the learned Tribunal has not considered and discussed the aforesaid vital controversy raised by the appellant. It is settled principle of law that when objections are raised by Insurance Company in regard to its liability towards payment of compensation to the claimants, the Tribunal is required to render a decision upon the said issue even in the matter of no fault liability.

10. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the learned Tribunal is set aside and the case is remitted back to the learned Tribunal for passing fresh order, considering the aforesaid petition of the appellant in accordance with law. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed.

11. Let the statutory amount deposited by the appellant be returned to it through cheque.

(Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J) rohit/-

AFR/NAFR       NAFR
CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading Date 14.10.2017
Transmission N.A.
Date