United India Insurance Company Limited v. Ila Saikia and 2 Ors

O R D E R

03.04..2024

This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging the order dated 06.05.2023 passed in MAC Case No.17/2021.

¶2From the materials on record, it reveals that a claim proceedings was initiated before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Golaghat by the respondent No.1 herein. The said claim proceedings was registered and numbered as MAC Case No.17/2021.

¶3In the said proceedings though notice was duly issued, no written statement was filed. Thereupon, the matter was placed before the National Lok Adalat on 13.08.2022. In the said National Lok Adalat, the said proceedings was disposed of on compromise whereby the petitioner herein who was the Opposite Party No.3 duly agreed for payment of Rs.10,00,000/- as full and final settlement towards the said claim. On the basis thereof, the order was passed on 17.08.2022 by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Golaghat. Thereupon, some time in the year 2023, an application was filed by the petitioner for recalling of the said award. The said application was registered and numbered as Petition No.810/23. The learned Tribunal vide the order dated 06.05.2023 had rejected the said application on the ground that the claim case was amicably settled by the said notice and the settlement form was duly Page No.# 3/4 signed by the petitioner herein through its Divisional Manager one Sri G. K. Doloi. It is against this order dated 06.05.2023, the present proceedings has been initiated. Apart from that, the petitioner has also assailed the settlement agreement dated 13.08.2022 and 17.08.2022 as well as the order dated 17.08.2022.

¶4I have heard Mr. R. C. Paul, the learned counsel for the petitioner who submitted that the policy of the vehicle is only a carrier legal liability policy, and as such, without there being an additional policy taking into account that the vehicle in question was an oil tanker, the petitioner cannot be saddled with the liability of Rs.10,00,000/-.

¶5This Court had also heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶6Upon hearing the learned counsels for the parties, a pointed query was made to Mr. R. C. Paul, the learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether from a perusal of the policy conditions which have been enclosed as Annexure-7 to the instant proceedings, there is any requirement for the said oil tanker to have an additional policy for covering any accident or mishap. Nothing could be pointed out by Mr. R. C. Paul, the learned counsel for the petitioner. This Court also cannot be unmindful of the fact that there is a sanctity attached to an award passed in a Lok Adalat. Unless there is a grave error which is apparent on the face of it, the question of disturbing with the sanctity attached to the award does not arise. Else, it would be resulting in making the provisions of Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 non-efficacious and resulting in every person challenging any award which has been passed upon compromise. Page No.# 4/4

¶7In the instant case, there being no grave error of fact or law shown before this Court, the question of interference with the settlement dated

13.08.2022 as well as the award dated 17.08.2022 do not arise.

¶8Consequently, this Court also does not find any error in exercise of jurisdiction by the learned Tribunal in its order dated 06.05.2023.

¶9Accordingly, the instant proceedings stands dismissed with a cost of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner before the learned Tribunal.

¶10Interim order if any stands vacated.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010148122023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oCRP/131/2023o UNITEDoINDIAoINSURANCEoCOMPANYoLIMITEDo AoPUBLICoSECTORoUNDERTAKINGoCOMPANYoREGISTEREDoANDo INCORPORATEDoUNDERoTHEoCOMPANIESoACT,o1956,oHAVINGoITSo REGISTEREDoOFFICEoATo24oWHITESoROAD,oCHENNAI-600014oWITHoONEo OFoITSoREGIONALoOFFICEoAToCHIBBERoHOUSE,o2NDoFLOOR,oG.S.oROAD,o GUWAHATI-5,oREPRESENTEDoBYoITSoREGIONALoMANAGER,oGUWAHATI,o KAMRUP(M),oASSAM VERSUSo ILAoSAIKIAoANDo2oORSo W/O-oSRIoBIRENoSAIKIA,oR/O-oVILL.-oKOMARMOTIoGAON,oO.P.o MOUTGAON,oP.S.oANDoDIST.oJORHAT,oASSAM,oPIN-o781126. 2:PUTULoPHUKAN oS/O-oLATEoTIKOLoPHUKAN oR/O-oVILL.-oHAZARIoGAON oP.O.oBORPATHAR oP.S.oANDoDIST.oGOLAGHAT oASSAM oPIN-o781025. 3:PANKAJoDAS oS/O-oMANIKoDAS oR/O-oVILL.-oHAZARIoGAON oP.O.oBORPATHAR oP.S.oANDoDIST.oGOLAGHAT oASSAM oPIN-o781025o Forkthekappellant(s)kkkkkkkk:kMr.kR.kC.kPaul,kAdvocatek o Page No.# 2/4 For the respondent (s) : Mr. M. Dutta, Advocate, Mr. D. Mandal, Advocate BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH