Oriental Insurance Company Ltd v. Smti Santwana Goswami and 4 Ors

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV) Heard Ms. R.D. Mozumdar, learned counsel representing the appellant as well as Mr. M. Dutta, Mr. A.J. Saikia and Mr. D. Gogoi, learned counsels appearing for the respondents. Page No.# 3/5

¶2This is an appeal under Section 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment dated 24.04.2018 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jorhat in MAC Case No.32/2011.

¶3On 03.01.2011 at about 5 A.M, Late Pabitra Jyoti Baruah went out of the house for a walk. When he was walking on the left side of the road, a truck bearing Registration No.AS-03 D/9161 came from behind. The truck suddenly applied brakes, as a result of which, the rear portion of the truck skidded and hit Pabitra Jyoti Baruah. He sustained serious injuries and lost his life.

¶4A claim application was filed before the Tribunal. The said truck was covered by an insurance policy of the appellant Oriental Insurance Company Limited.

¶5Oriental Insurance Company Limited contested the claim case by stating that the truck bearing Registration No.AS-03 D/9161 was actually hit by another vehicle bearing Registration No. AS-03 B/0558 from behind and that is why, the accident took place.

¶6Truck bearing Registration No. AS-03 B/0558 was insured by New India Assurance Company Limited. After going through the written statement of Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the Tribunal impleaded New India Assurance Company Limited, a party in the claim case.

¶7The New India Assurance Company Limited contested the case by filing written statement wherein they denied the claim raised by Oriental Insurance Company Limited. Page No.# 4/5

¶8Finally, the Tribunal held the Oriental Insurance Company Limited responsible for the accident and directed it to pay a compensation of ₹24,10,000/- (rupees twenty-four lakhs ten thousand only).

¶9The present appeal has been filed on two grounds – the first ground is that the vehicle bearing Registration No. AS-03 B/0558 was equally responsible for the accident. Therefore, it's Insurance Company i.e. the New India Assurance Company Limited should have been fastened with the liability to pay a part of the compensation and the second ground is that the monthly income of the deceased was erroneously held to be ₹18,000/-.

¶10I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides.

¶11The Oriental Insurance Company Limited pleaded that the vehicle bearing Registration No. AS-03 B/0558 was equally responsible for the accident as it hit the other vehicle from behind. But the Oriental Insurance Company Limited did not examine any witnesses to prove that fact. Therefore, the plea taken by the Oriental Insurance Company Limited remained not proved.

¶12The deceased Pabitra Jyoti Baruah was working with the Railways and he took voluntary retirement from service. Before his retirement, he was earning a salary of ₹1,20,000/- (rupees one lakh twenty-thousand only). After his retirement, he was earning pension. The learned Tribunal assessed his income on the basis of his salary which he used to earn before his retirement. The Tribunal also relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that was delivered in National Insurance Page No.# 5/5 Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Ors., reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 for assessing the income of the deceased. I find that the learned Tribunal has correctly assessed the monthly income of the deceased.

¶13Under the aforesaid premised reasons, this Court is of the opinion that the present appeal is devoid of merit and stands dismissed accordingly. Send back the LCR.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/5 GAHC010188232018 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oMACApp./822/2018ooooooooo ORIENTALoINSURANCEoCOMPANYoLTDo AoCENTRALoGOVT.oUNDERTAKINGoHAVINGoITSoREGIONALoOFFICEoATo GUWAHATI,oULUBARI,oGUWAHATIo781007oREPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoASSTT.o MANAGER,oGAUHATIoREGIONALoOFFICE,oULUBARI,oGUWAHATIo781007 VERSUSo SMTIoSANTWANAoGOSWAMIoANDo4oORSo W/OoLATEoPABITRAoJYOTIoBARUAH,oR/OoTARAJANoSMASHANoROAD,o TARAJAN,oDIST.oJORHAT,oASSAM,oPINo785001o(FORoSELFoANDoONoBEHALFo OFoHERoMINORoCHILDERNoSRIoPRACHURJYAoJYOTIoBARUAHoANDo KUMARIoPRAGYAoPRIYAoBARUAH) 2:PARESHoCH.oSHARMA oS/OoLATEoG.C.oSHARMA oR/OoKENDUGURI o2oNO.oBRAHMINoGAON oP.O.oCHENGALIoGAON oDIST.oJORHAT oASSAM PINo785010 3:SHRIoSANTOSHoGOWALA oS/OoSRIoCHANDRAoGOWALA oR/OoDULIAoGAON oGUWALoBASTI oP.O.oGARMUR oDIST.oJORHAT oASSAM oPINo785107 4:SRIoJADAVoCH.oBORDOLOI Page No.# 2/5 S/O SRI G.K. BORDOLOI R/O PULIBOR P.O. R.R. LAB P.S. PULIBAR DIST. JORHAT ASSAM PIN 785006 (OWNER) 5:THE BRANCH MANAGER NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. SIVASAGAR BRANCH DIST. SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN 78564 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. R D MOZUMDAR Advocate for the Respondent : MR P BORTHAKUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA For the Appellant : Ms. R.D. Mozumdar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. M. Dutta, Mr. A.J. Saikia and Mr. D. Gogoi, Advocates. Date of Hearing : 26.09.2023. Date of Judgment : 05.10.2023.