The National Insurance Company Limited v. Smti Damayanti Boro and 4 Ors

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV) Heard Mrs. R.D. Mozumdar, learned counsel representing the appellant as well as Mr. D. Mondal, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶2This is an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment dated 11.12.2014 and order dated 07.02.2015 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.2, Kamrup in MAC Case No.1950/2012. Page No.# 3/4

¶3On 30.09.2012, the deceased Rinku Boro was driving a Pulser motorcycle bearing registration No.AS-01-AR-2775. Sri Ajit Boro was riding the pillion. Both of them were going from Changsari towards Chowki Gate. When they reached near Lakhi Nagar, they were knocked down by an incoming truck bearing registration No.NL-01-K-3827 (Trailor). Because of the impact, Rinku Boro instantly died.

¶4Rinku Boro was 20 years old at the time of his death and as a private service holder, he earned `8,000/- per month. He was unmarried and left behind his parents and a sister.

¶5The mother Damayanti Boro filed a claim case for seeking compensation. The Insurance Company contested the claim case by filing written statement.

¶6On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues: I. Whether the deceased Rinku Boro died due to injury sustained in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 30.09.2012 involving the vehicle bearing registration No.NL-01-K-3827 (Trailor)? II. Whether the vehicle in question was driven by the driver in a rash and negligent manner? III. Whether the driving licence and insurance policy were valid on the day of the accident to cover up the accident? IV. Whether the claimant is entitled to get any compensation?

¶7During the hearing, the claimant side examined two witnesses, Page No.# 4/4 namely-the claimant Damayanti Boro and the pillion rider Ajit Boro. The insurance company also examined one witness, named Tapan Kr. Chakraborty. On conclusion of hearing, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of `5,45,000/- to be paid by the Insurance Company.

¶8The only ground of appeal taken by the Insurance Company is that the Insurance Company is not solely responsible for payment of compensation because the accident was a head on collision between two moving vehicles and therefore, part of the responsibility also goes to the other vehicle.

¶9The pillion rider Ajit Boro has stated in his evidence that it was a head on collision between the motorcycle and the other vehicle. There is clear-cut evidence that it was a head on collision between the motorcycle and the Trailor.

¶10From the evidence, it is established that the motorcycle had equally contributed to the accident. Therefore, the Trailor is not solely responsible for the accident. This Court is of the opinion that the Tribunal had committed error by overlooking this fact.

¶11The appeal is allowed. The appellant Insurance Company is liable to pay 50% of the awarded compensation i.e `2,72,500/- to the claimant. The appeal is disposed of. Send back the LCR. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010014572015 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oMACApp./115/2015ooooooooo THEoNATIONALoINSURANCEoCOMPANYoLIMITEDo SUBSIDIARYoOFoGENERALoINSURANCEoCORPORATIONoOFoINDIAo REGISTEREDoHEADoOFFICEoATo3,oMIDDLETONoSTREET,oCALCUTTAo700071, REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoMANAGER,oGAUHATIoREGIONALoOFFICE,o BHANGAGARH,oGUWAHATI-781005 VERSUSo SMTIoDAMAYANTIoBOROoando4oORSo W/OoPARESHoBORO 2:PARESHoBORO oS/OoUNKNOWN 3:RENUKAoBORO oS/OoPARESHoBORO oALLoAREoR/OoSILA oKARAIBARI oP.S.oKAMALPUR oDIST.oKAMRUP oASSAM. 4:KASHINATHoPAUL oS/OoLATEoK.P.oPAUL oGHOSALoPARAoLANE oP.O.oHALISAHAR oP.S.oBIJPUR oDIST.oNORTHo24oPARGANAS oWESToBENGAL Page No.# 2/4 PIN 743134 5:MD. SHEKH FARID S/O MD. J. SHEKH E-2 ESAT DOCK JUNCTION KOLKATA-88 WEST BENGA Advocate for the Petitioner : MS.R D MOZUMDAR Advocate for the Respondent : MR D MONDAL PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA For the Appellant: Mrs. R.D. Mozumdar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. D. Mondal, Advocate. Date of Hearing: 06.06.2023. Date of Judgment: 15.06.2023.