2025:JHHC:33531 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C. M. P. No. 1035 of 2025 ----- Managing Director, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Office at Parivahan Parishar, Birchand Patel Road, Near Phulwari Jail, P.O.-B.V. College, P.S.-Airport, Dist.-Patna, Bihar represented through Ashish Kumar, S/o Bhim Pandey, Regional Manager, B.S.R.T.C., Gaya Ji, R/o Gaya, Professor Colony, P.O.-Head Post Office, P.S.-Civil Line, Dist.-Gaya, Bihar … …. Petitioner Versus Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd. Deoghar, Office at Deoghar, P.O. & P.S.-Deoghar, Dist.-Deoghar … …. Opp. Party ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mukesh Kr. Dubey, Advocate ----- Oral Order 02 / Dated : 10.11.2025 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 09.04.2025 passed in Execution Case No. 09/2023 by the Motor Vehicle Claim Tribunal, Deoghar, whereby and whereunder, the petition dated 08.01.2025 has been rejected and it has been held that the case for recovery of the awarded amount from the Corporation was maintainable. 2. The facts of the case are not in dispute that a sum of Rs.7,22,009/- was awarded in favour of the claimants in Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Case No. 02 of 2006 for a sum of Rs.6,08,850/- with a direction to the Insurance Company to pay the said amount. Insurance Company preferred appeal in M.A. No. 177 of 2017 which was disposed of with direction that the appellant Insurance Company shall satisfy the award in favour of the claimants within six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the said order with liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle in question. 3. The Insurance Company after making payment initiated the execution proceeding for recovery of amount and against which the instant civil misc. petition has been filed. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that since the right to recovery has been given, the Insurance Company should have filed a suit and the Tribunal was devoid of jurisdiction to order execution. 2025:JHHC:33531 2 5. This Court is not impressed by the argument. Law is settled that when the right to recovery has been awarded, it is very much within the jurisdiction of the Executing Court i.e. Tribunal to proceed for execution and realization of the amount. This civil misc. petition stands dismissed. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) AKT/Satyendra