^.^•I\. ^^ • ^•SjO^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Coram DIVISION BENCH HON'BLESHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINKA, J. Misc. Appeal (Cl No. 181 of 2007 APPELLANTS RESPONDENTS 1. Smt. Satwati Nayak W/o. late Shri Dhaniram Nayak, aged about 38 years, r^ktence of village - Khusarupali, Thana - Pithoura, Tahsil & Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.5 2. Keertiram Nayak s/o Late Shri Tularam Nayak aged about 65 years, residence of village - Khusampali, Thana - Pithoura, Tahsil & Distt. Maha^imund (C.G.) Versus 1. Babulal Patel,S/o Shri Bodhram Patel, aged about 30 years, occupation ^riculturist, r/o village - Sindhupali, Thana - Pithoura, Thasil & distt. MahaKimund (C.G.) (Registered owner of the Vehfcle No. C.G. 06/5883) 2. The New India Insurance Company Limited through Branch Manager, the New India Insurance Company Limited, Branch Offioe, Madina Building, Jail Road, Raipur (C.G.) (Insurerofthe Vehicle No. C.G.- W5S63) MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTORVEHICLESACT Present Shri Sunil Sahu, leamed counsel for ttie app^lants. Shri G.V.K Rao, learned counsel for responderrt No.2. ORDER (24m August, 2009) The following order of the Court was passed by RajeevGupta, C.J.: Learned counsel for the parties are heard on admtssion. 2. The appellants are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribural, Mahasamund (for short the Tribunal') vide award dated 03.11.2006, passed in Glaim Case No.33/2(X». 3. As against the compensatlon of Rs.34,90,0(M3/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow and father of deceased Dhaniram Nayak by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for hls deafh in the mcrtor accident on 22.05.2005, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1 ,00,000/- as compensation to the claimants along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 4. According to the claimants, deceased Dhaniram Nayak was driving his friend's motorcycle bearing registratton No.C.G.06/5883. which dashed against an unknown Stationary Truck r^ulting in multipleserious injuries to Dhaniram Nayak, who suecaimbed to those injuries during the courae of his treatment in the hospitsd on 28-05-2005. 5. The Tribunal held that the deceased himself was responsible for the accldent and as such the claimants were not entitled to get any compensation on the basis of negligence - based claim. The Tribunal.Jiowever, finding that extra-premium of Rs.50/- was paid FTf— '<,, for P.A. coverage by the owner of the vehicle directed the insarer of the motorcycle to pay a sum of Rs.1 ,CU,000/- as com(»nsatton to the claimants on account ofthe P.A. coverage. 6. A bare perusal of the Insuranee Policy reveate that the P.A. coverage, by paying extra-premium of Rs.S)/-, was only for 'Owner-Cum-Driver' which would necessarily mean that the PA. coverage was meant for the owner of the vehicle when he himself was driving the vehicle in question. 7. Be that as it may, as the insurer of the vehicle has not flled any appeal challenging the award, we are not inclined to set aslde the award passed by the Tribunat granting a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to the claimants. 8. As the appellants'/claimants' claim was flled unda- Secflon 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act; the deceased himself was driving the motorcycle at the time ofthe accident; the unknown Truck ws® Stationary even according to the claimants, we do not flnd any scope for enhancement of the compensation in the caae. 9. The appeal, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and te hereby dismissed summarily. --— Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge nimml