THE RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD v. SMTI AINA BALA ROY
MACApp./338/2018 · 2026-02-19
Mridul Kumar Kalita
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5499 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5499 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010060142026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/958/2026 THE RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AND HEAD OFFICE AT RECTIFIER HOUSE 570, NIGAM CROSS ROAD RD, WADALA,, MUMBAI 400031 AND ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT ANIL PLAZA, ABC, G.S. ROAD,GUWAHATI 781005 REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGER, GUWAHATI OFFICE, ANIL PLAZA, G.S. ROAD, VERSUS SMTI AINA BALA ROY W/O LTE LAKHI KANTA ROY ALIAS LAXMI KANTA ROY, 2:SRI KRISHNA ROY S/O LATE LAKHI KANTA ROY ALIAS LAXMI KANTA ROY 3:SRI BISHNU ROY S/O LATE LAKHI KANTA ROY ALIAS LAXMI KANTA ROY 4:MS RADHIKA ROY
D/O LATE LAKHI KANTA ROY ALIAS LAXMI KANTA ROY ALL ARE THE RESIDENTS OFVILLAGE-RATIADAHA PART II P.O.- RATIADAHA P.S.- GOLAKGANJ DIST. DHUBRI ASSAIM. CLAIMANTS 5:SRI SUBRATA MUKHERJEE
S/O LATE KALYAN KUMAR MUKHERJ R/O.VILLAGE-GOSANI ROAD
Page No.# 2/4 DINHATA DISTRICT- COOCH BEHAR WEST BENGAL OWNER OF THE VEHICLE NO. WB63/3017SUPER BUS 6:SRI NOOR ISLAM S/O SRI BASIRUDDIN MIAH R/O.VILLAGE- BORO ATHIABARI P.S. DINHATA DIST.COOCHBEHAR WEST BENGAL. DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE NO. WB63/3017 SUPER BU Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R GOSWAMI, MS. P BORTHAKUR Advocate for the Respondent : , MACApp./338/2018 (D/O) THE RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE and HEAD OFFICE AT RECTIFIER HOUSE 570 NIGAM CROSS ROAD RD WALDHA MUMBAI 400031 AND ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT ANIL PLAZA ABC GS ROAD GUWAJATI 781005 REP BY THE MANAGER GUWAHATI OFFICE VERSUS SMTI AINA BALA ROY LATE LAKHI KANTA ROY @ LAXMI KANTA ROY VILL RATIADAHA PART II PO RATIADAHA PS GOLKGANJ DIST DHUBRI ASSAM 2:KRISHNA ROY LATE LAKHI KANTA ROY @ LAXMI KANTA ROY VILL RATIADAHA PART II PO RATIADAHA PS GOLKGANJ DIST DHUBRI ASSAM 3:BISHNU ROY LATE LAKHI KANTA ROY @ LAXMI KANTA ROY VILL RATIADAHA PART II PO RATIADAHA PS GOLKGANJ DIST DHUBRI ASSAM 4:RADHIKAR ROY
Page No.# 3/4 LATE LAKHI KANTA ROY @ LAXMI KANTA ROY VILL RATIADAHA PART II PO RATIADAHA PS GOLKGANJ DIST DHUBRI ASSAM 5:SUBRATA MUKERJEE LATE KALYAN KUMAR MUKHERJEE RO VILL GOSANI ROAD DINHATA DIST COOCH BEHAR WEST BENGAL 6:NOOR ISLAM SO BASIRUDDIN MIAH RO VILL BORO ATHIABARI PS DINHATA DIST COOCH BEHAR WEST BENGAL ------------ Advocate for : Advocate for : MR D KALITA (R-1 4) appearing for SMTI AINA BALA ROY
In MACApp. Case No. 338/2018
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA
ORDER 06.05.2026 [1] Heard Ms. M. Saikia, the learned counsel for the applicant/insurance company. [2] This interlocutory application has been filed by the applicant/insurance company praying for refund of the statutory deposit of Rs. 25,000/- filed by the applicant/insurance company at the time of filing of the MACAppeal No. 338/2018. [3] The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the aforesaid appeal has been disposed of on 20.02.2026 by this court. However, no order as regards refund of the statutory deposit was made in the
Page No.# 4/4
judgment passed by this court. [4] After going through the judgment passed on 20.02.2026, in MACAppeal No. 338/2018, it appears that though order for refund of the statutory deposit was made therein. [5] Hence, this interlocutory application is allowed. [6] The Registry is directed to refund the statutory deposit of Rs. 25,000/- which was made by the present applicant/insurance company at the time of filing of the MACAppeal No. 338/2018 after proper verification. [7] The learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that though at the time of filing the MACAppeal No. 338/2018, the name of the applicant/insurance company was Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., however, the name has now been changed to Indusind General Insurance Co. Ltd. and, therefore, the applicant with its new name may be allowed to withdraw the statutory deposit. [8] The prayer is allowed. [9] This interlocutory application is, accordingly,
disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant