Patna High Court
The National Insurance Company Limited, Through Its Divisional ManagerversusSumitra Devi and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The High Court upheld the compensation award, reduced the interest to 6% per annum, and affirmed the insurer’s right to recover from the truck owner.
Summary
The widow and children of Suresh Pandit, a government employee who died in a road accident caused by a truck, filed a claim before the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal against National Insurance Company Ltd, the insurer of the truck. The Tribunal awarded Rs 33,76,520 with 8% interest, also allowing the insurer to recover from the truck owner. The insurer appealed, contending that the truck‑owner’s documents were unverified and that interest should be 6% per annum. The High Court examined the factual findings, accepted the compensation amount, reduced the interest rate to 6% on the parties’ consent, and upheld the insurer’s right to pursue recovery against the truck owner. The Court directed the insurer to pay the award with 6% interest by 23‑02‑2026, failing which the original 8% interest and costs would apply.
Issues considered
- Whether the claim case as preferred is maintainable
- Whether the appellants have a valid cause of action to file the claim case
- Whether the deceased died in a motor vehicle accident due to rash and negligent driving of the truck
- Whether the driver of the truck had a valid driving licence and whether the owner violated any terms of the insurance policy
- Whether the deceased was a government employee with a monthly income of Rs 19,040
- Whether the applicants are entitled to compensation and, if so, the amount and to whom
- Whether the documents of the truck owner are verifiable
- Whether the interest rate on the award should be 6% instead of 8%
- Whether the insurer may pursue recovery against the truck owner
Subjects
- Motor accident
- Compensation
- Insurance liability
- Interest rate
- Claim Tribunal
- Government employee
- Appeal
- Set aside
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Appeal No.623 of 2017
======================================================
The National Insurance Company Limited, Through Its Divisional Manager
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Sumitra Devi W/o Late Suresh Pandit
2. Pawan Kumar S/o Late Suresh Pandit
3. Jitendra Kumar S/o Late Suresh Pandit
4. Aditya Kumar S/o Late Suresh Pandit (Res. 4 is minor and is under the
guardianship of natural guardian mother, Re All the above are resident of
Mohalla- Manpur, Kumahartoli, P.O.- Buniyadganj, P.S.- Muffasil, District
Gaya.
5. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Suman S/o Sri R.P. Yadav Resident of Village- Pratapi,
P.O./P.S.- Barachatti, District Gaya, Owner.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Durgesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
Mr. Abhijeet Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Laliteshwar Prasad Sharma, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 29-01-2026
Heard Mr. Durgesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel
for the appellant and Mr. Laliteshwar Prasad Sharma, learned
counsel for the respondents.
2.The present petition has been preferred for the
following relief/s:
“setting aside the judgment dated
22.12.16 and Award dated 21.02.17
passed by Sri. Hasmuddin Ansari, 7th
Addl. Dist. Judge cum Motor Accident
Patna High Court MA No.623 of 2017 dt.29-01-2026
2/8
Claim Tribunal, Gaya (here in after
referred to as the Tribunal), in MAC
Case no. 01 of 16/77 of 14 'Sumitra
Devi & others v/s The National
Insurance Co. Ltd & another' by which
compensation has been allowed
against the appellant”.
3. The facts leading to the present appeal is/are as
under:
4. One Suresh Pandit who was a government
employee with the Sub-Divisional Office, Gaya was moving on
his vehicle bearing registration no. BR-02T-3321. As he
approached the G.T. road, a truck bearing registration no. UP-
65AT-6024 driving in a rash and negligent manner dashed the
vehicle from the opposite side. Suresh Pandit sustained grievous
injury and died on the spot. Subsequently, the lady/children
moved before the 7th Additional District Judge-Cum-Motor
Accident Claim Tribunal, Gaya in MAC Case No. 01 of
2016/77 of 2014.
5. The Court framed the following issues:
(i) is the claim case as preferred
maintainable?
Patna High Court MA No.623 of 2017 dt.29-01-2026
3/8
(ii) have the appellants got valid
cause of action to file the claim case?
(iii) whether the deceased Suresh
Pandit died in a motor vehicle
accident on 09.12.13 at village
Pandey Bara on G.T. Road under P.S.
Chouparan, District-Hazaribagh, due
to rash and negligent driving by the
driver of truck bearing registration
No. UP-65 AT 6024?
(iv) whether the driver of the said
truck has valid and effective driving
license at the time of accident and
owner of the said truck violated any
terms and conditions of insurance
policy?
(v) whether the deceased was a Govt.
Employee and his monthly income
was Rs 19040/- per month at the time
of alleged accident?
(vi) whether the applicants are
untitled to get compensation of so to
Patna High Court MA No.623 of 2017 dt.29-01-2026
4/8
what amount and to whom?
6. Sumitri Devi (A.W.-01), wife of the deceased and
Mithilesh Pandit (A.W.-02) were examined. While Sumitri
Devi informed that upon knowledge, she rushed to the place
within an hour and found the dead body of her husband, A.W.-
02, Mithilesh Pandit an eye-witness and was present at the spot
and he narrated the story of the truck dashing the car in a rash
and negligent manner causing death of Suresh Pandit.
7. The truck was insured with the appellants’
company. The Insurance Company appeared and opposed the
case of the claimants stating that the truck was plying without
permit and the truck driver was not having valid driving license.
The truck owner, however, provided the driving license of the
driver (DL No.WB 1119790109754) valid till 07.04.2016 as
also the permit which was valid between 09.04.2013 to
08.04.2014.
8. The Court after hearing the parties, came to the
conclusion that:
(i) the deceased, Suresh Pandit, a
government employee was driving
the vehicle bearing registration no.
BR-02T-3321;
Patna High Court MA No.623 of 2017 dt.29-01-2026
5/8
(ii) the truck bearing registration
no. UP-65AT-6024 hit the car;
(iii) Suresh Pandit died on the spot;
(iv) the truck was insured with the
National Insurance Company Ltd.
having validity period from
24.02.2013 to 23.02.2014;
(v) the truck owner provided the
valid driving license/insurance
certificate as also the permit.
9. Taking into account the salary of the claimant’s
husband as Rs. 19040/- with 30% future prospect and after the
necessary deduction in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble
Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) & Ors. vs. Delhi
Transport Corporation & Anr reported in (2009) SCC 211
came to the conclusion that she is entitled to Rs.34,26,520/-.
After the deduction of Rs.50,000/- which was paid as interim
compensation, the lady is entitled to Rs.33,76,520/- which is to
be paid with 8% interest.
10. Aggrieved, the present appeal.
11. Learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Durgesh
Kumar Singh submit that the documents placed by the truck
Patna High Court MA No.623 of 2017 dt.29-01-2026
6/8
owner could not be verified and as such ‘the Tribunal’ should
have given the right to recovery, if the documents are found
otherwise/invalid. Further submission is that while allowing the
claim of the claimants, instead of giving the simple interest of
6% per annum, ‘the Tribunal’ actually ordered 8% interest per
annum.
12. Upon notice, the claimant has appeared and
learned counsel, Mr. Laliteshwar Prasad Sharma on instruction
submits that the death took place in the year 2013, the widow is
still waiting for the Award amount. The family is in financial
crisis. Further submission is that two points have been raised by
the appellants’ company:
(i) to allow them to pursue the case
against the truck owner in
accordance with law;
(ii) to reduce the interest amount
from 8% to 6%.
13. The submission on instruction is that the
claimants do not have any objection to the two prayers put
forward by the appellants’ company.
14. The Court has gone through the facts of the case
and the materials on record. The admitted position has already
Patna High Court MA No.623 of 2017 dt.29-01-2026
7/8
been recorded. The claim of the appellants’ company is that the
documents which were put on record remained unverified. In
that background, the appellants’ company prayer that they be
given the right to pursue the remedy in accordance with law, if
they so want against the truck owner has to be accommodated.
15. So far as the interest part is concerned, as on
instruction, the learned counsel representing the claimants-
respondents have submitted that the claimants have no objection
if the same is reduced to 6%, the order dated 22.12.2016 and
21.02.2019 is modified only to the extent that they can pursue
the case further in accordance with law if they are able to make
out any case against the Truck owner. Further, the interest
amount with the consent of the parties is reduced to 6% per
annum.
16. In that background, this Court disposes of M.A.
No. 623 of 2017 with a direction to the appellants’ company to
pay the original amount of Rs.33,76,520/- with 6% interest by
23.02.2026. Failure to do so, not only the appellants shall be
entitled to the original 8% interest on the amount of
Rs.33,76,520/- as originally ordered by the Tribunal, she shall
also be entitled to Rs.10,000/- as cost which shall be realized
from the Officer who delays payment of the Award amount.
Patna High Court MA No.623 of 2017 dt.29-01-2026
8/8
17. Learned counsel for the claimants undertakes to
provide the bank account details of the lady/children within a
week to Mr. Durgesh Kumar Singh for forwarding it to the
Insurance Company.
18. The statutory amount, if any, has to be returned.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 30.01.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…