2025:JHHC:10319 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI M. A. No. 111 of 2008 ----- M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Divisional Office-1, S.N. Ganguly Road, Main Road, Town and Dist.-Ranchi through Deputy Manager, OIC Sri S.P. Singh, S/o Sri Mathura Singh, R/o Morabadi, P.O. & P.S.-Bariatu, Dist.-Ranchi … …. Appellant Versus 1. Smt. Jaleshwari Devi, W/o of Late Gupteshwar Ojha, R/o Q No. 108/2/2, Road No. 8, Aditapur, P.O & P.S.-Adityapur, Dist.-Saraikela 2. Sanyal Kashyap, S/o Late Sanjay Kumar Ojha, represented through his grandmother Smt. Jaleshwari Devi 3. Sommya, D/o Late Sanjay Kumar Ojha, represented through her grandmother Smt. Jaleshwari Devi, All R/o G/29, P, Road, Bistupur, P.O. & P.S.-Bistupur, Town-Jamshedpur 4. Suinaina Mishra, W/o Sri Hem Sunder Mishra, R/o Grand Samiethy, Works Foundary Road, Burmamines, P.O. & P.S.-Burmamines, Singhbhum East, Jamshedpur 5. Rameshwar Choudhary, S/o Kishan Choudhary, R/o C.C.P.L, Godown Grand Samiethy, Burmamines, P.O & P.S.-Burmamines, Jamshedpur … …. Respondents ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY ----- For the Appellant : Mr. Abhay Kumar Mishra, Advocate Ms. Adya Mishra, Advocate For the Respondents : ----- Oral Order 19 / Dated : 03.04.2025 1. The Insurance Company is in appeal against the judgment and award of compensation in Compensation Case No. 105/2006 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, whereby and whereunder, liability to pay the compensation amount has been fixed on the Insurance Company. 2. As per the case of the claimant, deceased Sanjay Kumar Ojha was a permanent employee of Tata Iron and Steel Company and while going on his motorcycle bearing Registration No. BR 16L-8058 he met with an accident with the trailer bearing Registration No. NL05A 6125, resulting in his death. 2025:JHHC:10319 2 3. As per the case of the claimant, the offending vehicle was under the insurance cover of the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.-present appellant. 4. The Insurance Company appeared before the Tribunal and admitted in its show cause that Sunaina Mishra-O.P. No. 2 was the owner of the said trailer which was under its insurance cover at the time of accident. The Tribunal held that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the trailer and consequently, the Insurance Company was held liable to pay the compensation amount. 5. This appeal has been preferred on the ground that the claim has been preferred by the mother of the deceased but the wife has not been impleaded in the claim application. It is further argued that the deceased was not having a valid driving license and was not wearing helmet at the time of accident. 6. I do not find any merit in the instant appeal. The Insurance Company cannot raise these pleas, as there is definite finding that the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of the trailer, therefore, it does not make any difference whether the deceased was having a driving license or he was wearing helmet at the time of accident or not. Further, no evidence has been led on behalf of the Insurance Company to show that the deceased did not had a valid driving license at the time of accident. So far as not impleading the wife of the deceased is concerned, this plea is not available to the Insurance Company for denying the payment of the insurance amount to the claimant. This appeal being devoid of any merit is dismissed with cost. The statutory amount, if any, which was deposited before this Court at the time of filing of this appeal, shall be remitted to the Tribunal for disbursement to the claimant(s), which will be adjusted against the compensation amount. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) AKT/Satendra