IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR' Misc. Appeal {C} No. IM^C[ B *' .. . ?•"> . B E©^@^^y\r^:^K SSVWWiiii U>ii:ijl'.EE APPELLANT £>'a..."' )^-Reliance General Insurance Company ^'b>'--^ ^.^-U Limited, Through Manager, Branch Office- •»y— l^llllAL^LA, AlllUL^^ll IVXdllCl.^t^l , ,..--"7'^-y:A-^.,^ Ravi Bhawan G.E. Road Raipur (C.G.) c*»': •^7". .'v«fli&'2; •u^v" VERSUS ?< ...-'-•^.'...^^' RESPONDENTS !)„ Smt. Meena Manhare Wd/o Late Dukhuram Manhare, aged about 38-years, 1-- 1 ^uiU-^iAvaw. Mawhaye. \yj 2) ^ Sajit Kumar S/o Late (Rajkumar Sahu^ aged about 17years, - "^ ^ 3) (,4) (5) Ku. Anita D/o Late Dukhuram Manhare, aged about 16 years, Arait Kumar S/o Late Dukhuram Manhare, aged about 14 years, Ku. Sunita D/o Late Dukhuram Manhare, aged about 10 years, Respondent no. 2 to 5 minor represented through natural guardian mother Smt. Meena Manhare Wd/o Late Dukhuram Manhare, All R/o Village Binori, Tahsil Masturi, . District Bilaspur (C.G.) (CLAIMANTS) Manglu Yadav S/o Pardeshi Yadav, aged about 26 years, R/o Village Kaneri, Tahsil Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.) (DRIVER OF METADOR N0. C.G. 10 ZB 11741 7) ^ Roshanlal Bhardwaj S/o Shri Thakurram Bhardwaj, R/o Village Dhoradih (Pachpedi), Post Loharshi, Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) (OWNER OF METADOJt N0. C.G. 10 ZB 1174) MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION^73 OFTHE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988 AS AMENDED BY ACT OF 1994 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Hon'ble Shri I.M. Quddusi. J. & Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, J. .A.(C)No.14of2009 APPELLANT RESPONDENTS Reliance Generai Insurance Company Limited. Versus Smt. Meena Manhare and others. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MQTOR VEHICLE ACT. 1988 Appearance: Shri Sachin Singh Rajput, counsel for the appellant. Shri Vimlesh Bajpayee, counsel for the respondents No.6 & 7. ORAL ORDER Following oral order of the Court was passed by This appeal has been filed by the Reliance Genera! Insurance Company Limited against the impugned award dated 09/09/2008 of the VI Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (C.G.) passed in Claim Case No. 45/2008. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 22/02/2008 at about 01.30 p.m. deceased Dukhuram Manhare after loading the paddy of one Narendra Naik on the Metador 407 bearing registration No. C.G.' ZB./1174 was going to Bilha Mandi sitting with some other labourers on the back side of the vehicle for the security of loaded paddy. As they reached near Kasturba Ashram Pachpedi, the respondent No.6 driving the vehicle rashly and negligently turned the vehicle turtte and Dukhuram Manhare died on the spot. The deceased was aged about 44 years. He was working as Labourer and his monthly income was Rs.4000/- per month. Claimants have claimed Rs.6,87,000/- as compensation, 3. !n para 9 of the award it has been mentioned that the driver of the vbhicle which was Metador 407 is a Light Motor Vehicle and the driver was having vaiid driving licencefor Light MptorVehicle. ^,;;_.......^-—— - a-- 4. No doubt the Metador 407 is a Light Motor Vehicle as in the definition of Light Motor Vehicle given in sub section 21 of Section 2 of the Motor Vehicles Act "light motor vehicle" means a transport vehicle or omnibus the gross vehicle weight of either of which or a motor car or tractor or road-roller the uniaden weight of any of which, does not exceed 7,500 kilograms;" but in Sectiqn 14 it has been provided that the driving icence issued or renewed under the Motor Vehicle Act in case of I'cence to drive a transport vehicle be effective for a period of three years but the Light Motor Vehtele licence No. M/690/2004 granted to the driver is for years issued on 19/05/2004 and valid upto 19/05/2024. 5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Oriental Insurance Company Umited vs. Angad Kol and others reported in 2009 (11) SCC 356 noticed Sections 2(10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (21) and Sections 3,9,10,14 ofthe Act and Rules 14 and 16 of Central Motor Vehides Rules, 1989 along with Forms 4 and 6, and after noticing eariier judgment of Supreme Court in case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Annappa Irsppa Nesana alias Nesaragl andottiers reported in 2008 (3) SCC 4S4, New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Prabhu Lal (supra) and Ashok Gangadhar Maratha vs. Oriental Insurance Company reported in f999 (8) SCC S20 held : "a transport vehicle may be a light motor vehicle but for the purpose of driving the same, a different iicence is require to be obtained." The licence having been granted for a period of 20 years, a presumption therefore, arises that it was meant for the purpose of the vehicle other than transport vehicle. Had the driving licsnce been granted for.transport vehicle, the tenure could not ha'/e exceeded to 3 yeare. 6. In view of the above mentioned facts and circumstance, it is a fit case to remit back the matter to the Tribunal for decision afresh. Neediess to mention that the parties shall be allowed to adduce evidence, amend their pleadings, file documents or to get the documents verified ete. thereafter, the decision shall be taken afresh. Parties shall appear before the M.A.C.T. concemed on 22'"' February, 3011. Lower Court Rscord be sentbackwithoytftirtherdelay. -— SA'- l.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- '," Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge ^ !*-^^1..—. BeiSEaiwsuif