Smt. Bhabani Ghosh Vs Kulwant Singh and Another

Jharkhand High Court 8 May 2003 A.F.O.O. No. 140 of 2001 (2003) 05 JH CK 0019
Bench: Division Bench
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

A.F.O.O. No. 140 of 2001

Hon'ble Bench

Gurusharan Sharma, J; Amareshswar Sahay, J

Advocates

M.B. Lal, for the Appellant; None, for the Respondent

Acts Referred
  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 166

Judgement Text

Translate:

1. Smt. Bhabani Ghosh, wife of late Biswajil Ghosh of Nirsa, District-Dhanbad filed Title (MV) Suit No. 46 of 1990, u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act'') claiming compensation on account of death of her husband on 30.10.1989 in a motor accident.

2. While going on a motor cycle (BER-7542) her husband was dashed by a truck DH - 2554) and he lost his life.

3. Owner of the truck neither appeared nor filed any written statement nor contested the case. However, the insurer appeared, filed written statement and contested the case. According to insurer the truck was never insured with them and the driver was also not possessing any valid driving licence at the time of accident.

4. The tribunal in the impugned judgment recorded finding that driver of the truck was responsible for the accident, as he was driving the truck rashly and negligently and that he had also no valid and effective driving licence at the relevant time. The insurance policy bearing No. 1611037 was not issued from Dhanbad Divisional Office of the Company.

5. The tribunal further observed that the oral evidence adduced by the claimant regarding monthly income of the deceased was not supported by any document.

6. According to claimant her husband was employed as typist in Eastern Coalfields Limited and was earning Rs. 2500/-per month. His pay slip was brought on record but it was simply marked X for identification. Though Head clerk of Eastern Coalfields was examined as PW 4 and he had proved the pay slip of the deceased.

7. We do not appreciate the manner in which the tribunal disposed of the claim case. It has not recorded any finding whether driver of the truck was responsible for the accident in question. Further, simply because driving licence of the driver was not brought on record, the tribunal was not justified in holding that driver of the truck was not possessing any valid driving licence at the time of accident. In our view, without holding detailed enquiry in the matter it was not proper for the tribunal to observe that the truck involved in the accident was never insured with the National Insurance Company Limited.

8. The impugned judgment and award, therefore, cannot be sustained and consequently are set aside and the matter is remitted to the concerned tribunal for disposal afresh after giving opportunity to the parties for adducing further evidence if any, within six months from the date of receipt/production of this order. Lower Court records may be sent down forthwith.

From The Blog
Delhi HC Frozen Semen Case: Govt Challenges Order Allowing Parents to Inherit Dead Son’s Gametes, Legal Vacuum in Indian Law Exposed
Feb
02
2026

Court News

Delhi HC Frozen Semen Case: Govt Challenges Order Allowing Parents to Inherit Dead Son’s Gametes, Legal Vacuum in Indian Law Exposed
Read More
Budget 2026: New Tax Rules for Sovereign Gold Bonds Limit Exemption to Original Buyers Holding till Maturity
Feb
02
2026

Court News

Budget 2026: New Tax Rules for Sovereign Gold Bonds Limit Exemption to Original Buyers Holding till Maturity
Read More