Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010082762026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1366/2026 ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD HAVING ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT GUWAHATI GS ROAD ULUBARI GUWAHATI 781007 REP BY THE DEPUTY MANAGER GUWAHATI REGIONAL OFFICE ULUBARI GUWAHATI 7 VERSUS MRS REKHA GOGOI AND 4 ORS W/O LT SUNIL GOGOI RESIDENT OF LOHARI KACHARI GAON (THARMAL), NEAR NAMGHAR, P. O. AND P.S. - TINSUKIA DISTRICT - TINSUKIA, ASSAM PIN - 786125 PRESENT ADDRESS GANESHGURI, NEAR GANESH MANDIR, GUWAHATI, DISTRICT - KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. J PIN - 781006 2:SMTI JIMPI GOGOI D/O LATE SUNIL GOGOI 3:MANASH GOGOI S/O LATE SUNIL GOGOI ALL ARE R/O LOHARI KACHARI GAON (THARMAL) NEAR NAMGHAR P.O. AND P.S. TINSUKIA DIST. TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN 786125 PRESENT ADDRESS GANESHGURI NEAR GANESH MANDIR GUWAHATI DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN 781006 Page No.# 2/7 4:SMTI RINKUMONI TAID DOLEY W/O SRI RAKESH KUMAR TAID R/O DHEMAJI NAGAR WARD NO. 3 P.O. AND P.S. DHEMAJI DIST. DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN 787057 5:JIBON BORAH S/O SRI DHARMESWAR BORAH R/O BADHAKARA P.O. BADHAKARA P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST. NORTH LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN 78703 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. R D MOZUMDAR, MS. C MOZUMDAR,MR. S P SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : , Linked Case : MACApp./404/2026 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD HAVING ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT GUWAHATI GS ROAD ULUBARI GUWAHATI 781007 REP BY THE DEPUTY MANAGER GUWAHATI REGIONAL OFFICE ULUBARI GUWAHATI 7 VERSUS REKHA GOGOI AND 4 ORS W/O LT SUNIL GOGOI RESIDENT OF LOHARI KACHARI GAON (THARMAL) NEAR NAMGHAR P. O. AND P.S. - TINSUKIA DISTRICT - TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN - 786125 PRESENT ADDRESS GANESHGURI NEAR GANESH MANDIR GUWAHATI DISTRICT - KAMRUP (M) ASSAM. J PIN - 781006 2:SMTI JIMPI GOGOI Page No.# 3/7 D/O LATE SUNIL GOGOI 3:MANASH GOGOI S/O LATE SUNIL GOGOI ALL ARE R/O LOHARI KACHARI GAON (THARMAL) NEAR NAMGHAR P.O. AND P.S. TINSUKIA DIST. TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN 786125 PRESENT ADDRESS GANESHGURI NEAR GANESH MANDIR GUWAHATI DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN 781006 4:SMTI RINKUMONI TAID DOLEY W/O SRI RAKESH KUMAR TAID R/O DHEMAJI NAGAR WARD NO. 3 P.O. AND P.S. DHEMAJI DIST. DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN 787057 5:JIBON BORAH S/O SRI DHARMESWAR BORAH R/O BADHAKARA P.O. BADHAKARA P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST. NORTH LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN 787032 ------------ Advocate for : Samujjal Pratim Sharma Advocate for : MR. A MANNAF appearing for REKHA GOGOI AND 4 ORS Page No.# 4/7 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 16.09.2026 1. Heard Ms. R. D. Mozumdar, the learned counsel for the applicant Insurance Company. Also heard Mr. A. Mannaf, the learned counsel for the opposite party/claimants. 2. This Interlocutory Application has been filed by the applicant Insurance Company in connection with MAC Appeal No. 2614/2025, praying for stay of execution of the judgment and award dated 16.11.2024 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 2, Kamrup (Metro) in MAC Case No. 301/2020 during the pendency of the connected MAC Appeal No. 2614/2025. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the aforesaid judgment and award has been impugned by the applicant Insurance Company in the connected appeal and said appeal has already been admitted. 4. She submits that since in the connected appeal, a ground is taken by the present applicant that the deceased was a Government servant. As such, the claimants will continue to get the salary which the deceased was getting at the time of his death along with increments, till the year when he would have attained the age of superannuation. As such, she submits that there may be no loss of dependency in this case. 5. She however, submits that the applicant-Insurance Company is not averse to depositing undisputed amount awarded against Page No.# 5/7 conventional heads of Rs.1,65,000/- which was granted to the claimants against the heads loss of spousal consortium, funeral expenses, loss of estate and loss of parental consortium. In support of his submission, the learned counsel for the applicant has cited a ruling of the Apex Court in the case of “Krishna & Others Vs. Tek Chand & Others” [Judgment dated 05.02.2024 in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 5044/2019]. 6. On the other hand, Mr. A. Mannaf, the learned counsel for the opposite party/claimants has submitted that he does not have any objection regarding the prayer for grant of stay of the execution of the impugned judgment and award during the pendency of the connected appeal, however, subject to the condition that the Insurance Company may be directed to deposit 50% of the awarded amount. 7. He further submits that even if the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant is considered at this stage, still there may not be any difficulty in directing them to deposit the amount which was awarded to the claimants against future prospects along with other conventional heads. In support of his submission, he has cited a ruling of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of “Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Putuli Barman” (Judgment dated 24.03.2026 in MAC Appeal No. 573/2025). 8. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and I have gone through the materials available on record. Page No.# 6/7 9. The connected appeal has already been admitted. As such, there is logic in support of the contention that the execution of the impugned judgment and award may be stayed during the pendency of the connected appeal. However, the dispute between the parties at this stage is regarding the condition to be imposed for such grant of stay. 10. On perusal of the judgment cited by the learned counsel for the claimants/respondents, it appears that in the said case, only an observation has been made regarding grant of future prospect in that particular case. However, every case is to be judged on the basis of the facts involved in that case. 11. The contention that there is no loss of dependency of the claimants due to the prevailing scheme of the Government of Assam to continue to give the amount equivalent to the salary of the deceased till the year of attaining superannuation by the deceased has to be decided in the connected appeal. 12. The question whether under such circumstances future prospects may be added to the income of the deceased while computing the compensation has also to be decided in the connected appeal at the time of final hearing. 13. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the view that it would serve the ends of justice if the execution of the impugned judgment and award is stayed during the pendency of the connected appeal, subject to deposit of amount of compensation against conventional heads on which there is no dispute between the parties as such, the execution of the impugned judgment and order passed in MAC Case Page No.# 7/7 no. 301/2020 is hereby stayed subject to deposed of an amount of Rs. 1,65,000/- by the Insurance Company before the Registry of this Court within a period of four weeks from the date of this order. On such deposit being made, the same shall be disbursed to the claimants by the Registry after proper verification. 14. With the above observation, this Interlocutory Application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant