Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Civil)/129/2026 of CHOLAMANDALM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs SMTI PONALI NARAH ALIAS SONALI NARAH on 15 September 2026
GAHC010214902025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/129/2026 CHOLAMANDALM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AND HEAD OFFICE AT SHAW WALLACE BUILDING NEW NO. 319 OLD N. 154 2ND FLOOR THAMBU
GAHC010214902025
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/129/2026
CHOLAMANDALM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AND HEAD OFFICE AT SHAW WALLACE
BUILDING NEW NO. 319
OLD N. 154
2ND FLOOR
THAMBU CHETRY
CHENNAI
PIN 600001
INDIA
ITS ZONAL OFFICE AT OFFICE NO. 201 AND 202 L AND T CHAMBERS
2ND FLOOR
16 CAMAC STREET
KOLKATA 700017 AND ITS GUWAHATI REGIONAL OFFICE AT 4TH FLOOR
AASTHA PLAZA
BORA SERVICE
G.S. ROAD
GUWAHATI
KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM 781007 REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY MANAGER LEGAL CLAIMS
OF GUWAHATI REGIONAL OFFICE
VERSUS
SMTI PONALI NARAH ALIAS SONALI NARAH
WIFE OF SRI DIPAK NARAH PERMANENT RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE
PUTHIBIL
POLICE STATION- NORTH LAKHIMPUR
DISTRICT- LAKHIMPUR
PIN CODE- 787001
ASSAM
2:SRI DIPAK NARAH
SON OF LATE KAMAL NARAH
3:MISS BIJOYA NARAH
DAUGHTER OF SRI DIPAK NARAH
ALL ARE PERMANENT R/O VILL. PUTHIBIL
PIN 787001
ASSAM.
4:SRI RAJA MILI
SON OF BITAL MILI
RESIDENT OF AHOMONI
POLICE STATION -NORTH LAKHIMPUR
DISTRICTLAKHIMPUR
PIN CODE- 787052. ASSAM. (OWNER OF VEHICLE AS-07-AC-4200 TRACTOR)
5:SRI BANAMALI DAS
SON OF BIPUL DAS
RESIDENT OF- CHECKBANDH
POLICE STATION- NORTH LAKHIMPUR
DISTRICT- LAKHIMPUR
PIN CODE- 787001. ASSAM. (DRIVER OF VEHICLE AS-07-AC-4200 TRACTOR)
6:RAJA MILI
S/O BITAL MILI
R/O AHOMONI
PIN 787052
ASSAM.
7:BANAMALI DAS
S/O BIPUAL DAS
R/O CHACKBANDHI
PIN 787001
ASSAM.
------------
Advocate for : Tridib Kalita
Advocate for : appearing for SMTI PONALI NARAH ALIAS SONALI NARAH
Page No.# 3/5
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 16.09.2026
1. Heard Mr. T. Kalita, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. D. Mondal, learned counsel for the opposite party/claimants.
2. This interlocutory application has been filed by the applicant/Insurance Company under Order 41 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in connection with the connected MAC Appeal No. 21/2026, praying for stay of execution of the impugned judgment and award dated 03.05.2025, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 2, Kamrup (M), in MAC Case No. 565/2018 during the pendency of the MAC Appeal No. 21/2026.
3. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the aforesaid judgment and award has been impugned in the connected MAC Appeal No. 21/2026 and same has already been admitted. He further submits that the applicant/Insurance Company has challenged the finding of the Tribunal by which the Insurance Company was imposed the liability to pay the compensation, despite the fact that there are materials on record to indicate that the vehicle which was insured by the present applicant/Insurance Company was not involved in the accident. As such, he submits that the impugned judgment and award may be stayed during the pendency of the connected MAC appeal without any direction to deposit any amount by the applicant/Insurance Company.
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the claimants/opposite party submits that he does not have any objection to grant of stay, provided the
Insurance Company is directed to deposit 50% of the awarded amount as a condition for grant of stay of execution of the impugned judgment.
5. He submits that though the applicant/Insurance Company, in the connected appeal, has taken the ground that the involvement of the vehicle which was insured by the present applicant/Insurance Company was not involved in the accident, however, materials on record shows that the charge- sheet in the connected criminal case has been laid against the driver of the offending vehicle which was insured by the present applicant/Insurance Company.
6. He further submits that the claimants are ready to furnish an indemnity bond to ensure that in the event the appeal is allowed and the claimants are required to return back the money, they may do so.
7. After considering the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, this Court is of considered opinion that the rival contentions of the parties in the connected appeal shall have to consider while hearing the appeal finally. However, since the claim has been awarded in favor of the opposite parties/claimants, the interest of justice would be served if during the pendency of the connected appeal at least they are given 50% of the said amount with some conditions.
8. As such, this interlocutory application is allowed and the execution of the judgment and award dated 03.05.2025, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 2, Kamrup (M), in MAC Case No. 565/2018 shall remain stayed during the pendency of the connected MAC Appeal No. 21/2026, subject to deposit of 50% of the awarded amount by the applicant/Insurance Company before the Registry of this Court within a period of six weeks from the date of this order.
9. On such deposit being made, same shall be disbursed by the Registry to the claimants/opposite party Nos. 1 and 2, after proper verification, subject to furnishing of an indemnity bond of amount equivalent to the amount which shall be so disbursed to them.
10. With above observation, this interlocutory application is disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant