GUWAHATI, India, Nov. 12 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Oct. 12:

1. Heard Mr. Sishir Dutta, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. K. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1-4, Mr. S. Sahu, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.5 and 6 and Ms. A. Biyani, learned counsel for the respondent No.7.

2. In this appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the appellant Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. has challenged the judgment and award dated 10.01.2014 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT)/ Additional District Judge No.2, Sonitpur (learned Tribunal, for short), in MAC Case No.355/2010. It is to be noted here that vide impugned judgment and award dated 10.01.2014, the learned Tribunal has directed the appellant herein to pay a sum of Rs.21,49,955/-with interest @7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e. 15.11.2010, till payment to the respondent No.1/claimant.

3. The backgrounds fact, leading to filing of the present appeal is briefly stated as under:-

"On 25.08.2010, Md. Hamid Ali was proceeding on a motorcycle, bearing Registration No.AS-12F-4860 from 18th Mile towards Balipara on NH-52 as pillion rider and when the said motorcycle reached at 17th Mile, the vehicle No.AS-07B5591, being driven in a rash and negligent manner, hit the motorcycle. As a result, Hamid Ali sustained grievous injuries and succumb to the injuries.

The respondent Nos.5 and 6 in this appeal and opposite party Nos.1 and 2 in the MAC Case No.355/2010 appeared before the Tribunal, filed their written statement denying the negligence on the part of the driver/opposite party No.2 and taken a stand that the vehicle was insured with the opposite party No.3 i.e. the present appellant, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and the liability, if any, has to be borne by the said opposite party. The appellant herein being the opposite party No.3 in the MAC case, filed written statement and contested the case and denied the statement and averment made in the claim petition and also taken a stand that the amount of compensation claimed by the claimant is very exaggerated and speculative and the insurer is not liable to indemnify the insured till it is proved that the driver of the vehicle had a valid driving licence and the condition of insurance policy was not violated by the insured.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=eISc8sUCYnQFBVP%2BVeJCOJDCuHH%2By28CrtYDiw1WFP4ELQSpk0LsVDQDmmMHkjdf&caseno=MACApp./347/2017&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010029772017&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.