HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA CONT.CAS(C) NO.81 OF 2025 1. Smt. Dhankanya Debbarma. W/O Late Chandra Mani Debbarma 2. Smt. Rima Debbarma (34) D/O Late Chandra Mani Debbarma 3. Sri. Binod Debbarma (31) S/O Late Chandra Mani Debbarma All are residents of Vill- Joy Ram Para, (Mangal Sardar Para) P.O. Champaknagar, P.S Jirania Dist- West Tripura, PIN-799045 ……..Petitioner(s) Vs. 1. Sri. NAMJANGLUNG GANGMEI (Divisional Manager), National Insurance Company Ltd.. Agartala, Division, 42 Akhaura Road P.O. H.P.O. Agartala, P.S. West Agartala Dist West Tripura, PIN 799001. 2. Smt. Jayita Singha, D/O- Sri. Chandra Singha Administrative Officer National Insurance Company Ltd. Divisional Office, 42 Akhura Road P.S. West Agartala, Agartala Tripura West, 799001. ………Respondent/contemnor(s). Present: For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sukhendu Debbarma, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : None. HON’BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD Order 03.12.2025 1. This present case came up today at the motion stage. Heard Mr. Sukhendu Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. 2. This contempt case has been filed for drawing up contempt proceedings against the respondent/contemnors for willful and deliberate violation and disobedience of the judgment and order dated 21.08.2025 in MAC. APP. No. 63 of 2025 passed by this Court. Page 2 of 2 3. It is the case of the petitioner that vide impugned order dated 21.08.2025, despite the direction of this Court to deposit the awarded amount of Rs.45,55,300/- by the Insurance Company with the Registry of this Court as early as possible, preferably within a period of one month from today, if not already deposited, the respondents, in spite of lapse of more than three months from the date of judgment, did not deposit the awarded compensation as per the direction given in the said judgment and order. 4. Mr. S. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, submits that despite the impugned order and the time limitation, the contemnor-respondents did not comply with the same even after lapse of more than three months. 5. Heard and perused the record. 6. Upon hearing the learned counsel and on perusal of the record, this Court is of the view that non-deposit of the awarded amount in a motor accident claim does not amount to willful disobedience so as to invoke the contempt jurisdiction. The proper remedy for the petitioners is to pursue the execution proceedings for realization of the awarded amount. If execution has already been initiated, the petitioners may continue with the same, if not, they are at liberty to file an execution petition for enforcement of the award. 7. Accordingly, the present contempt petition stands dismissed. As a sequel, stay, if any, stands vacated. Pending application(s), if any, also stands closed DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD, J Suhanjit SABYASAC HI GHOSH Digitally signed by SABYASACHI GHOSH Date: 2025.12.04 16:11:16 +05'30'