Authority: Calcutta High Court (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)

Order Date: 05 August 2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Appellant – Future Gen India Insurance Co. Ltd.; Respondents – Salma Bibi, Sabina Khatun, SK Diddik, Momena Nesha Bibi (wife, minor daughter, father and mother of the deceased) with C.O.T. 147 of 2025.
  • Original Proceeding: MAC Case No. 650 of 2021 before the Additional District Judge, Paschim Medinipur, judgment dated 19 September 2024.
  • Accident Facts: Occurred on 15‑08‑2021 at ~6:30 PM. The 21‑year‑old deceased (SK Halim) was walking when a Tata Ace vehicle bearing No. WB‑33E/1949, allegedly driven at high speed, struck him, causing fatal injuries. The driver was detained by locals.
  • Original Award: Total Rs 8,86,000 awarded as follows – Rs 300,000 each to Salma Bibi and minor Sabina Khatun, Rs 100,000 to SK Diddik, and Rs 1,86,000 to Momena Nesha Bibi. The insurer (OP No. 2) was directed to issue four account‑payee cheques within three months, with interest at 6% per annum from filing date to 19‑Sep‑2024, and a final deadline of 18‑Dec‑2024. The amount for the minor was to be kept in a fixed deposit until she attained majority.
  • Grounds of Appeal: The insurer contended that vehicle WB‑33E/1949 was the offending vehicle, while evidence from OPW‑1 (Jiten Doloi) indicated involvement of a different vehicle, WB‑33E/5748, which was not insured and therefore not impleaded. The appellant argued the case was not maintainable against the owner of WB‑33E/1949 and sought set‑aside of the award.
  • Court’s Observations: The court noted that OPW‑1’s statement, despite lacking documentary proof, implicated vehicle WB‑33E/5748 and could not be dismissed. It highlighted possible collusion between the insurer and OPW‑1 and between claimants and the police. The court therefore found merit in remitting the matter for fresh determination of vehicle involvement and compensation quantum.

Final Outcome

  • The appeal (FMA‑1201 of 2025) is allowed in part; the judgment and award dated 19 September 2024 is set aside.
  • The matter is remitted to the learned trial court to re‑examine (i) which vehicle (WB‑33E/1949 or WB‑33E/5748) was responsible, and (ii) the appropriate quantum of compensation.
  • Claimants are permitted to withdraw Rs 5 lakh (plus interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim to the present) without prejudice to their rights.
  • If the trial court later finds vehicle WB‑33E/1949 responsible, the balance of the original award will be paid by the insurer as per the original award. If vehicle WB‑33E/5748 is found responsible, the owner of that vehicle (or its insurer, if any) will bear the balance, and the insurer may recover Rs 5 lakh plus interest from that owner.
  • The balance amount with accrued interest is to be returned to the appellant/insurance company.
  • COT‑147/2025 is dismissed.
  • An urgent photostat certified copy of the order may be obtained upon compliance with requisite formalities.

Topics: Motor Accident Compensation, Insurance Appeal