Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010211212022 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3130/2022 SRI JITUMONI BORAH S/O LATE TARUN CH. BORAH, R/O VILL. and P.O. BIRAHIGAON, P.S. and DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, HAVING ITS REGISTERED AND HEAD OFFICE AT ICICI BANK TOWERS, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, MUMBAI-400051 AND ONE OF THE REGIONAL OFFICE AT APEEJAY HOUSE, PARK STREET, KOLKATA-700016 AND ONE OF THE BRANCH AT M.S.S. PATH (G.S. ROAD), CHRISTIANBASTI, GUWAHATI-781005, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.P SUNDI, MR G S BORO Advocate for the Respondent : , Linked Case : MACApp./263/2016 SRI JITUMONI BORAH S/O LATE TARUN CH. BORAH R/O VILL. and P.O. BIRAHIGAON P.S. and DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. VERSUS ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. JORHAT BRANCH DIST. JORHAT ASSAM. ------------ Advocate for : MR.P SUNDI Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for : MR.K BORAR appearing for ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI ORDER 19.06.2025 Heard Mr. P. Sundi, learned counsel for the appellant/claimant. Also heard Mr. S. Pegu, learned counsel for the respondent/Insurance Company. Seen the note sheet of Registrar General dated 16.06.2025 in connection with I.A.(C) 3130/2022 wherein a clarification has been required whether the deposited amount of Rs.1,34,000/- is to be released entirely to the appellant, “Jitumoni Borah” or the same is to be released to both the sons of the deceased, viz. Jitumoni Borah and Jan Borah i.e. claimants in MAC Case No. 744/2011. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. I have also seen the memo of appeal. It is seen that as one of the claimants i.e. Jitumoni Borah has preferred MAC Appeal No. 263/2016 and in the said MAC Appeal, Jitumoni Borah and Insurance Company have also filed a joint compromise petition stating that they have settled an additional amount of Rs.1,34,000/- as final compensation apart from Rs.66,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. In view of the above, though it appears that the appeal has been preferred by one of the claimant i.e. Jitumoni Borah and the compromise deed was also executed between the appellant, Jitumoni Borah and the Insurance Company, however, it is not known whether the other claimant, Jan Borah had Page No.# 3/3 knowledge regarding filing of appeal by the present appellant, Jitumoni Borah. It is seen that the compromise deed is also silent regarding apportionment of amount to the brother of the appellant, Jan Borah. There is no reflection in the compromise deed that the appellant has another brother namely, Jan Borah and he was one of the claimant in MAC Case No. 744/2011. The note sheet of Registrar General dated 27.06.2023 has not been brought to the notice of this Court. Hence, there is no reflection in the order dated 29.07.2024 regarding apportionment of any amount between the appellant and his brother Jan Borah. I have perused the judgment of the Tribunal dated 08.06.2016 from which it reveals that two sons of the deceased Jitumoni Borah and Jan Borah were the claimants in MAC Case No. 744/2011. As per order of the learned Tribunal, the compensation amount be equally divided between all the claimants, namely, Jitumoni Borah and Jan Borah (sons of the deceased). It is true that the appeal has been preferred by one of the claimant i.e. Jitumoni Borah but it is not reflected in the memo of appeal that the other claimant has no objection or on behalf of him the present appellant i.e. Jitumoni Borah filed MAC Appeal vide No. 263/2016 before this Court. Under such backdrop, as it appears that the Tribunal has equally divided the compensation amount between both the claimants i.e. the appellant and his brother Jan Borah, hence, Jan Borah is also entitled to receive half of the awarded amount. Accordingly, Registry is directed to release Rs.1,34,000/- to the appellant, Jitumoni Borah and his brother Jan Borah on equal share basis. JUDGE Comparing Assistant