Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010037612019 2025:GAU-AS:1470 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : MACApp./157/2019 DILOWARA BEGUM (WIFE) AND 5 ORS W/O- LATE BUDDUSH ALI 2: MD. AYNAL HOQUE (MINOR SON) S/O- LATE BUDDUSH ALI 3: NARZINA BEGUM (MINOR DAUGHTER) D/O- LATE BUDDUSH ALI 4: HAFIJA PARBIN (MINOR DAUGHTER) D/O- LATE BUDDUSH ALI 5: FAJAR ALI (FATHER) S/O- LATE CHANDU ULLAH 6: RUPA KHATUN (MOTHER) W/O- FAJAR ALI ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF VILL.- SARU ARIKATA P.O.- MAHTOLI P.S. BOKO DIST.- KAMRUP (R) ASSAM PIN- 78112 VERSUS THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ABC, BHANGAGHAR, GUWAHATI-5, KAMRUP (M), ASSAM 2:ABDUL JALIL S/O- ABDUL HUSSAIN Page No.# 2/7 R/O- VILL.- TOPER PATHAR P.S. CHHAYGAON DIST.- KAMRUP (R) ASSAM PIN- 781138 3:HANIF ALI S/O- SHOMEJ ALI R/O- VILL.- BHULUKABARI P.S. CHHAYGAON DIST.- KAMRUP (R) ASSAM PIN- 78113 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A MANNAF, MS F BEGUM,MS J BEGUM Advocate for the Respondent : MS R BEGUM (R1), MR. N SHARMA (R1),MR. J A AHMED,MR R B ISLAM Linked Case : MACApp./323/2019 KHADIJA BEGUM AND 3 ORS. W/O- LATE ZAHRUL HOQUE @ ZAHIRUL HOQUE R/O- VILL.- CHAMPUPARA GAON P.O. CHAMPUPARA BAZAR P.S. CHHAYGAON DIST.- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN- 781124. 2: ZERIFA PARBIN (MINOR) D/O- LATE ZAHRUL HOQUE @ ZAHIRUL HOQUE R/O- VILL.- CHAMPUPARA GAON P.O. CHAMPUPARA BAZAR P.S. CHHAYGAON DIST.- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN- 781124. 3: KHURSED ALI S/O- LATE HAZI RUSTAM ALI R/O- VILL.- CHAMPUPARA GAON Page No.# 3/7 P.O. CHAMPUPARA BAZAR P.S. CHHAYGAON DIST.- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN- 781124. 4: SHALEHA KHATUN W/O- KHURSED ALI R/O- VILL.- CHAMPUPARA GAON P.O. CHAMPUPARA BAZAR P.S. CHHAYGAON DIST.- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN- 781124. VERSUS THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND 2 ORS REP. BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER REGIONAL OFFICE ABC BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI-5 KAMRUP(M) ASSAM. (INSURER OF THE OFFENDING VEHICLE). 2:ABDUL JALIL S/O- ABDUL HUSSAIN R/O- VILL.- TOPER PATHAR P.S. CHHAYGAON DIST.- KAMRUP(R) ASSAM PIN- 781138. (OWNER OF THE OFFENDING VEHICLE). 3:HANIF ALI S/O- SHOMEJ ALI R/O- VILL.- BHULUKABARI P.S. CHHAYGAON DIST.- KAMRUP(R) ASSAM PIN- 781136. (DRIVER OF THE OFFENDING VEHICLE). ------------ Advocate for : MR. A MANNAF Advocate for : MS R BEGUM (R1) appearing for THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND 2 ORS Page No.# 4/7 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG ORDER Date : 13.02.2025 Heard Mr. A. Mannaf, learned counsel for the appellants along with Ms. R. Begum, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 and Mr. J. A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondents no.2 and 3. 2. It is seen that MACApp. No.157/2019 is analogous with the MACApp. No.323/2019 both arising out of a common judgment and award in MAC Case No.19/2018 and MAC Case No.20/2018 dated 31.12.2018 therefore both the matters are being heard together. 3. The facts of the case as projected by the appellants is that on 14.01.2018 at about 7:00 p.m. while the deceased Zahurul Hoque @ Zahirul Hoque and Budhush Ali on their way to the house of Budhush Ali on foot, met with an accident at Jorsimuli, when the Tractor bearing no. AS-25-CC-6780 was driving in very negligent and rash manner. Due to the accident, both, namely, Zahurul Hoque @ Zahirul Hoque and Budhush Ali died on the spot. The appellants being the legal-heirs of the deceased persons had filed an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming for compensation amounting to Rs.30,00,000/- in MAC Case No.19/2018 and MAC Case No.20/2018. 4. Thereafter the parties adduced their evidence and the learned trial court after hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties dismissed the claimed application on the grounds that there was a newspaper publication in the Assamese namely “Pratidin”, which was published on 15.01.2018. As per the newspaper Page No.# 5/7 publication, the said deceased Zahurul Hoque @ Zahirul Hoque was driving the tractor and Budhush Ali was a labour, where the said vehicle capsized when the driver lost control while the said vehicle tried running with sand from the river bank. 5. The learned Tribunal was of the of the opinion that the said news paper publication was not challenged by the claimants and further there was a delay in filing of the FIR, which was filed on 09.02.2018, while the accident took place on 14.01.2018. Thus on the grounds of the delay in filing the FIR and the accident as projected in the newspaper publication, which was not under challenge, the application of the claimants was dismissed by the learned Tribunal. 6. Mr. A. Mannaf, the learned counsel for the appellants submitted that even though there was a delay in filing the FIR, the reason for the appeal has been explained in the FIR and that it was also mentioned that there was a GD entry made on 14.01.2018. 7. He further submitted that the editor of the newspaper clipping was also not examined before the learned trial court and therefore the correctness of incident described in the newspaper clipping is not proved. 8. Ms. R. Begum, the learned counsel for the respondent no.1 on the other hand submitted that the FIR dated 09.02.2018 simply mentions about the GD entry was made on 14.01.2018. However, the GD entry was not produced before the learned trial court. Learned counsel thus submitted that since the main GD entry is not produced before the court, it cannot be taken that there was a GD entry made Page No.# 6/7 on the same date of the accident. 9. The learned counsel further submitted that besides of the delay in filing of the FIR, it cannot be said that the accident had occurred as claimed by the claimants that they were hit while they were the pedestrians. The facts of the accident has already been published in the newspaper dated 15.01.2018, which was duly exhibited by the defendants before the learned Tribunal and this shows that the deceased persons were not pedestrians when the accident occurred on 14.01.2018. 10. She further submitted that the case IO was also not examined before the trial court to ascertain that the accident had actually taken place as claimed by the claimants. 11. Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties, this Court on perusal of the documents on available in the LCR, finds that the copy of the GD entry claimed to be made on the date of the accident, i.e. 14.01.2018 was not produced for perusal before the learned trial court. It is also seen that the case IO was not examined, and he appear to be a necessary witness considering the projections made by the parties. 12. In view of the above, this Court finds to fit to remand the matter back to the learned Tribunal, wherein the GD entry in its original should be called for and the case IO should also be examined in the instant case for the proper adjudication of the matter. 13. If necessary, both the parties may also be given the Page No.# 7/7 opportunity to produce further evidence as found appropriate. 14. In view of the above, impugned order MAC Case No.19/2018 and MAC Case No.20/2018 dated 31.12.2018 passed by the learned Member, MACT, Kamrup, Amingaon stands set aside. 15. Both the parties are to appear before the learned Tribunal on 02.04.2025 for necessary further steps. 16. Accordingly, MACApp. No.157/2019 along with MACApp. No.323/2019 stands disposed of as above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant