The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Office Motijeel, Muzaffarpur v. Bimla Devi And ANR.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Appeal No.703 of 2012 =========================================================== The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional office Motijeel, Muzaffarpur through Sri Anil Kumar Biswal And Duly constituted Attorney The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Regional Office Pir Mohani Kadam Kuan Patna (Opp. Party No.2) .... .... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Bimla Devi wife of Late Satyendra Choudhary Alias Satyendra Sah, Resident Of Village Sahasram, P.S. Parihar, District Sitamarhi
2. Ranjit Pathak, Son of Jaideo Pathak, Resident of Village Bathnaha, P.O. and P.S. Bathnaha, District- Sitamarhi.
.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Durgesh Kr. Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Pramod Kr. Mallick =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 13-07-2017 This is an appeal filed by the Insurance Company under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act challenging the judgment and award dated 16.2.2012 and 22.5.2012, passed by the 1st Addl. District Judge, Sitamarhi-cum-Motor Vehicles Claim Tribunal, Sitamarhi in Claim Case No.23 of 1999. A question of law is raised by the claimant to say that as the accident in question took place within the territorial jurisdiction of Nepal, the Motor Accident Claims Case in Sitamarhi District, in the State of Bihar, was not maintainable.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the Insurance
Patna High Court MA No.703 of 2012 dt.13-07-2017 2/3 Company invited my attention to a judgment and order dated 5.10.2012, passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in M.A. No.782 of 2009 (Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Anarwa Devi & Ors., reported in 2013 ACC 469, to indicate that arising out of the same accident involving the same vehicle and on the same set of facts as in the case of Anarwa Devi (supra), the claim petition has been dismissed on account of the fact that the accident took place within the territorial jurisdiction of Nepal and the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act will not apply for such an accident. Even though learned counsel for the respondent by placing reliance on a judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court in First Appeal No.429/98 decided on 13.11.2010 (Smt. Sona Devi vs.
Anil Kumar) tried to indicate that a contrary view has been taken in the aforesaid judgment with regard to an accident that took place in Nepal, I am of the considered view that for the same accident with regard to a claim petition filed by co-claimant, a Bench of this Court in the case of Anwara Devi having already rejected the identical claim, the same being binding on me and there being no reason to take a different view, in view of the grounds and reasons already indicated in the order dated 5.10.2012 passed in the case of Anwara Devi (supra), this appeal is also allowed.
Patna High Court MA No.703 of 2012 dt.13-07-2017 3/3 Company be refunded back to the Insurance Company. The appeal stands allowed and disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon, CJ) K.C.jha/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 21.7.2017 Transmission Date N/A