tfUUUlUnyu^yu^!ftt»E^tft*U*n»nfll»4dllWBrflUnilUIJmit>f riulLff/tmT* ;C i\ • •.n'^ lu^iujirr' ciit^ssBsBusi.awt^AffiteauuiT' "wvtsssss '-s^ ,<.1<1 L.^''>" BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR tf. » M.A.IONo "i'^ /2010 APPELLANT PEFENDANT N0.2 :1. ^; S<B^ »...••'' usi.-'"' ....-^3%^ rf--^^ ^•:',^ IFFCO- TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, 34 Nerhru Place, New Delhi -110019 through the Branch Manager, Iffco- Tokio General Insurance Co.Ltd, 3rt Floor 345-347, Lalganga Shopping Mal, G.E Road Raipur (CG) VERSUS RESPONDENTN0.1 XAIMANT N0. 1 (^ Smt. Birij Bai, Widow, Late Manharandas Manikpuri, Aged about 28 years RESPONDENT N0.2 ,£'LAIMANTNO.2 Ku. Ranu, Daughter, Late Manharandas Manikpuri, Aged about 07 years (?>4inor). Respondent -2 minor represented through guardian mother Smt. Birij Bai. RESPONDENT N0.3 ^LAIMANT N0. 3 L Smt. Sohadra Bai, Widow, Late Manharandas Manikpuri, Aged about 30 years. All above are R/o - Kayabandha, Post Office- Rakhi, Police Station- Mandirhasoad, District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh). • ^ RESPONDENT N0.4 DE^FENDENT N0.1 ^ Topelal, S/o Kindra Singh Thakur, R/o Lohari, Post Office-Piperchedi, Police Station- Gariyabandh, District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh). (Driver and owner of motor cycle having registrafion no. CG 04 CQ 0549) MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLEACT, 1988 '? I '..^%. 1 ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR DB: Hoa'Ue I. M. QUDDUSI & Hon'ble G. MINHAJUDDIN, JJ APPELLANT8: RBSPONDBNT^: M.AtCl No.483/aal;Q ,IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. Snit. Birij Bai and ofhers MISC. APPEAL UNDER 8ECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLEaS ACT,1988 Appearance: Mr. Vikiant Siugh, counsel for the appeUaat. Mr. S.C. Venna, counsel for respondents 1 to 3. Mr. Tarun Dansena for respondent no.4. Per I.M. QUDDUSI. J. ORAL ORDER (20.07.2011) 1. This appeal has been filed by fhe Insuraace Conipaay agauist the impugned award dated 01.01.2010 passed by the IX Additional Motor Accident Clainis Tribunal (F.T.C), Raipur, Chliattisgarh iu Claim Case No. 12/2008. ^ 2. The facts briefly stated are that on 02.09.2007 at about 6.30 - p.in. non-appUcant no.l Toyelal who was driving the offendiag inotorbike beariug Regu.No.0549 ia a rash aad negUgent m.amier dashed fh.e i&otorcycle bearuig Regn. No.C.G.04/8032, as a result ofwhich, Manharaa Das Maxukpuri who was pillion rider of fhe inotorcycle No.C.G.04/8032 sustained grievous injuries aad died during the coiirse of treatment. The claiinaats beiiig dependents/legal representatives have filed claun petition u/s 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, for fhe award of total conipensation ofRs.4,70.000/- pnvanous heads. sf:'v '^'".ff'' 3. The Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.3,99,000/- which tfae claimants are entifled to receive from fhe non-applicants with 6% interest per atuiuni. 4. We bave perused fhe lower Court records as well as the impugned award. 5. The facts narrated in the iinpugned award aad the fiadiags given on the basis of ftic said fact are not correct ia view of the fact that the Sub-Inspector, of Police A.W.2 namely C.L. Uike had given his statement, which has not been considered. He stated that one Nasir Mirja had given iiifonnation regardiag the accident by a TVS Motor Cycle. On receipt of the said uiformation, be uiuaediately reached to fhe spot and seized three inotorcycles at the place of accident. On iuvestigation, he found that accused Toyelal waa coiniug towards Gariyabaad by driying his motorcycle bearmg Regn.No.C.G.04-C.V/0549 which was towiag another motorcycle. When he was driving th.e said motorcycle iu a rash and negUgent maruier, on the way near Nahat^aon culvert fhe m.otorcycle whicb was being towed by Toyalal by connectuig with his motorcycle C.G.04-C.V/0549 came on wrong side and dashed another Motorcycle that is Hero Honda (Passion Plus) commg from front side, as a result of which the driver aad piUion rider Manliaraii Das of fhe Passion Plus sustained uyuries and duriug the course of treatiaent, Manharau died. However, the facts narrated aad the findings given on fhe basis of those narrated facts iu fhe impugned award are some how different to ftie evidence of C.L. Uike(A.W.2). 6. From the evidence of C.L. Uike (A W.2) aad the seizure memo dated 02.09.2007 it appears that fhe towing motorcycle No. C.G. 04-C.V/0549 was driven rasbly and negl^enfly by Toyelal aud the TVS Centro motorcycle bearmg Regn.No.C.G.04/ CF/ 1910 which was being towed had. coiae on wrong side aad comiiutted accident by coIUcling with auofher inotorcycle bearing Regn.No.C.G.04/8032 which was commg from fix>nt side. We are of fhe opinion that the Tribuiial has not conducted proper enquiry as provided ia Rule 226 of C.G. M Rao Motor Vehicles Rules, 1996 aud Sections 168 & 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 7. In view of fhe above facts aad circuinstances, the niatter requires reconsideration at the end of fhe Tribunal. Hence, we allow this appeal in part aad reinit fhe inatter back to the Tribunal for decision afresh ia fhe l^ht of the observations inade in the foregoiag paragraphs. The Tribunal shall also consider as to whether it is necessary to implead fhe owner of Motorcycle bearmg Regu. Regn.No.C.G.04/CF/1910 as party/respondent aad whefher there was contributoiy negUgence on the part of any of fhese vehicles fhat is Motorcycle No. C.G.04-C.V/0549 aud Motorcycle No.C.G.04 /CF/1910. 8. Needless to inention that fhe parties shaU be aUowed to aniend fhe pleadiags, adduce further evidence, file docuiuents or get the docunients verified etc., and thereafter fhe Tribunal shaU take fhe decision afi-esh. The pardes shaU appear before the Tribunal on 24A Auaust, 2011. The records of fhe Tribunal shall be sent back forthwith. No order as to costs. SA'- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge sSf^ (ijM Motor Vehicles Rulcs, 1996 and Sections 168 & 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 7. In view of fhe above facts and circuxnstances, ttie matter requires reconsideration at the end of fhe Tribunal. Hence, we aUow fhis appeal ia part and reinit tbe iiiatter back to the Tribunal for decision a&esh iu fhe l^ht of fhe observations inade in fhe foregoiag paragraphs. The Tnbunal shaU also consider as to whether it is necessary to implead the owner of Motorcycle tiearing Regn. Regn.No.C.G.04/CF/1910 as party/respoiident aad whefher fhere was coatributoiy negl^ence on the part of any of ftiese vehicles fhat is Motorcycle No. C.G.04-C.V/0549 aud Motorcycle No.C.G.04 /CF/1910. 8. Needless to inention that the parties shaU be aUowed to amend the pleadings, adduce further evidence, file docuiaents or get the docuinents verified etc., and thereafter the Tribunal shatl take fhe decision a&esh. The parties shaU appear before the Tribunal on 24th August, 2011. The records of the Tribunal shafl be sent back forthwith. No order as to costs. Rao Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge