(^'A BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Djvjsjon Bench M.A. N0. r C ; g J"^ QF 2006. APPELLANTS :- NON-APPLICANT N0. 3 ESPONDENTS ^ . "/•' \< Xs<:\:^ yyy~ ^y,^- ^' y" ^" :- ^KJmted India Insurance Company Limited, Rajendra Nagar Chowk, Bilaspur (C.G.). VERSUS :-1. Chanda Bai, widow ofChandra Prakash Hindore, aged 26 years, 2. Ku. Archana, daughter ofChandra Prakash, aged about 9 years, 3. Ku. Chareshwari, daughter ofChandra Prakash, aged about 7 years, 4. Rajkumari Bai, wife ofBhagwatdas, agedabout 48 years, 5. Bhagwatdas, son ofJhumiulal Hindore, aged about 51 years, Respondent no. 2 and 3, minor, through their natural guardian mother Chanda Bai widow ofChandra Prakash Hindore, All resident ofDr. Ambedkar Ward, P.S. and Tahsil Mungeli, District Bilaspur (C.G.), CLAIMAINTS 6. Nagraj alias Pratap Singh, son ofPekhan Singh Rajput, aged about 43 years, Vehicle Driver Tractor no. C.G. 10-A 2529, resident ofDaupara Chowk, Mungeli, P.S. and Tahsil Mungeli, District Bilaspur (Chhattigarh), 7. Ashwani Kumar, son ofBhaskar Dutt Tiwari, aged about 37 years, Vehicle ^ • ? • - • A • ~ Owner Tractor no. C.G. 10-A 252^r Resident ofChamari, Post Gidha, Tahsil Mungeli, District Bilaspur (C.G.). NON-APPLICANTS N0. I AND 2 ...-/'" APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988. s^" _„...„_____.__._ •^.. ^sffj HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR DB: HON'BLB I.M. QUDDUSI & HON'BLB N.K. AGARWAL, JJ M.AfCl. No.8Sof2006 Vs. APPBARANCB: Mr. H. B. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate witih. Mr. Paakaj Agrawal, counsel for fhe appeUaats. Mr. K. K. Dewaagaa, counsel for respondents 1 to 5. Mr. Vivek Chopda, coiinsel for respondents 6 & 7. ORDER1QRAL1 (20.10.2010) Per I.M. QUDDU8I 1. This appeal has been filed by the Insuraace Coinpaay agamst impugned award dated 04.5.2010 passed by fhe Addl. Motor Accident Claiais Tribunal, MungeU, ia Claiai Case No.65 of 2004 whereby fhe UabiUty has been fastened on fhe Insuraace Conipaay as weU as on respondents 6 & 7. 2. Brief facts of fhe case as per fhe version of fhe claiaiaat are that deceased Chandra Prakash Hiadore was workiag as Peon m Municipal CouncU, Mungeli. On 27.03.2005 he was sittiag ia the niudguard of Tractor beariag Regn. No. C.G. 10-A/2529 which was used as water taaker by fhe department. The said vehicle was beiag driven by non- appUcaat no.l/respondent no.6 hereia aad due to rash aad negUgent driviag of the said Tractor by its driver, fhe Tractor suddenly jiunped as a result of which fhe deceased who •s, sittmg ou ftie mudguard fell down aad was crushed under APPBLLANTS United India Insuraace Coinpany Limited RESPONDBNTS Chanda Bai aiid otfaers -%. fhe wheels ofthe Tractor-Taaker aiid he died on the spot, At fhe tuiie of accident, fhe deceased was 25 years of age aad was drawiag monffaly wages ofRs.6000/-. Respondents 1 to 5 being clainiaats have filed claira appUcation aad claimed a total conipensation of Rs.39 lakhs on dtfferent heads. The Tribunal has awarded a total coinpensation of Rs, 8,87,400/- which fhe claiinaats are entitled to received froui fhe non-appUcants joiatly and severaUy. 3. It appears fhat fhe Tractor ia question was iasured for agricultural purpose under fhe Farmers Package PoUcy but it was used by fhe Miinicipal CouncU, Mungell, for canyiag water taak. The deceased was sitting on the inudguard of ftie Tractor betag aa employee ofthe Municipal /CouncU and it is stated tfaat he was deputed with the taolcer for distribution of water. It is not known as to whether fhe Tractor ia question was hired by fhe Municipal Council or not aad what was fhe purpose to depute the deceased with fhe water taaker. However, since fhe deceased was not an employee of fhe Tractor aad he was sittiag on the mudguard of the Tractor as gratuitous passenger, fhe iasurance coiapaay is not Uable to pay coinpensation. 4. The claiinaats have not imLpleaded fhe Municipal CouncU» Mungeli as party/non-appUcaat ia the claiin petition. Therefore, we cannot pass aay order ia respect of Municipal CouncU, Mungeli, which is not a party ia the claiia petition. 5. In view of fhe above, we aUow fhis appeal ia part, set aside fhe impugned award dated 04.05.2006 aad reinit the inatter back to fhe Tribunal for decidiag fhe claim petitioh>afi€sh after providiag opporturdty to fhe parties concemed to adduce fiirther evidence, ifaay, or to move aii appUcation by fhe claunaats for amendiaent tf fhey so desire to aaiend fheir pleadings. The aaioiint deposited by the Insuraace Compaay shall remam ia deposit aad fhe saine shaU be subject to fhe decision of fhe clauii petition. The records of the Tribunal shall be sent back to fhe tribunal forthwith. Sd/- I.M. Quddusi Judge Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge Rao