THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. MST. SUFIA MAZUMDAR W/O LT. TAFAZUL ALI MAZUMDER AND OTHERS
LAWS(GAU)-2018-3-127
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on March 22,2018

The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Appellant
VERSUS
Mst. Sufia Mazumdar W/O Lt. Tafazul Ali Mazumder And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

MR.KALYAN RAI SURANA,J. - (1.) Heard Mrs. R.D. Mozumdar, the learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. P.K. Deka, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents No.1, 2 and 3 and Mr. S. Dutta, the learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mrs. M. Choudhury, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.8. None appears on call for the respondent Nos. 4 to 7, the respective owners and drivers of the 2 (two) vehicles involved in the accident, as such, the appeal has been heard ex-parte against them.
(2.) This appeal is under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is directed against the judgment and award dated 23.12.2011, passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hailakandi (hereinafter referred to as the "Tribunal) in MAC Case No.45/2009.
(3.) This appeal is by the United Insurance Company Limited, who was the insurer of Tata truck bearing registration No.TR-01-E/1949, which was being driven by the respondent No.4, namely, Dilip Debnath. Amongst others, the primary grounds of appeal is that 2 (two) vehicles are involved in the accident, one being the truck insured by the appellant and the other vehicle being Tata Safari vehicle bearing registration No.AS-11- C/5713, driven by the respondent No.6 wherein the deceased, namely, Late Tafujul Ali Mazumder, was travelling at the time of the accident, as such, it is claimed that as 2 (two) vehicles were involved in the accident, the other vehicle too had contributed to the accident and therefore, the award passed by the learned Tribunal was required to be apportioned between both the Insurance Companies. The insurer of the Tata Safari Vehicle is the respondent No.8 i.e. Oriental Insurance Company Limited. The other issue raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that at the time when this appeal was filed, the appellant was relying on the ratio laid down in the case of Sarla Verma and others v. DTC and others, (2009) 6 SCC 121 and hoping for reduction of the award under the head of addition of future prospects, however, in view of the ratio laid down in the case of National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 8 Supreme 107, the learned counsel for the appellant is now claiming relief on the terms of the said case.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.