SHILLONG: The High Court of Meghalaya has dismissed a petition filed by the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd against the award of over Rs 10 lakh made in the year 2015, by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Shillong in favour of a woman whose husband, a taxi driver, was found dead.
After the hearing, the court ordered the manner of payment of the award amount together with interest.
According to the Court, the remaining award amount should be deposited by the insurance company with the Tribunal within 30 days from Monday.
The court also said that after deposit, the Tribunal will apportion 50% of the total award amount together with interest thereupon among the three children of the claimant in equal proportions; and will place the same in fixed deposit in a Scheduled Bank for a period of three years.
The petitioner , Miatmon Suchiang said that her husband Barwon Langstang was driving a Tourist Taxi of Tata Indica make, bearing registration No.ML 05 D 2322, which was owned by Wansalan Iakai.
The claimant submitted that her husband went missing along with the vehicle since October 6, 2003 and then, the body of her husband was recovered in a decomposed condition on October 10 that year at Puriang Village near NH-44 in a jungle but the said vehicle was not found; and a case was registered at Madanriting Police Station under Section 364 IPC.
It was also submitted that as per the post-mortem examination of the decomposed body of deceased, the cause of death was shock and asphyxia following strangulation by the neck.
The claimant further submitted that she was initially advised to make a claim under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1929 but, due to irregular functioning of the Authority under the said Act, she was unable to do so and then, she was advised to file the present claim application under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
While asserting and reiterating that he was not to be held responsible towards compensation, the owner of the vehicle took multifarious pleadings to the effect that the deceased driver was fully responsible for the incident and the owner was not in any way responsible and hence, there was no cause of action for claiming compensation from him.
The owner further submitted that when the vehicle and the driver went missing, the matter was reported to the police verbally and after the incident, the matter was reported to the creditor bank as also to the insurer for necessary action
He also maintained that he was holding a valid insurance policy, and hence, the insurance company was liable for compensation, if any.