u ^^ ® IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF_CIiHATISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A. ( C ) No.')^<^'4 72010 APPELLANT ^ON-APPLICANTNO.3 VERSUS 'The Oriental Insurance Go.Ltd., Branch Jagdalpur, Distt. Jagdalpur- tc.G.) BESPONDEIT_S •'NON-APPLICANTS 1, -TS^ CLAIMANTS NaushadAli @ Rana S/o Imdad Ali Musalman,Aged about 20 years, R/o Maujam Para, Keshkal, Distt. Bastar-fC.G.) —Driver— Smt. Neela Lambadi W/oN.K. Lambadi, Aged about 50 years, R/o Hatha Gi-ound Jagdalpur, • Distt. Jagdalpur-(C.G.) —Owner:- Smt. Rameshwari Bai W/o Mahesh Kumar Lonhare, Aged about 39 years, Caste-Mahar, R/o Rani Tarai, P.S. - Dfiori, Distt. Durg-(C.G.) Ku.Dhenuratna D/o Mahesh Kumar Lbnhare, Aged about 14 years, Hulas Kumar S/o Mahesh Kumar Lonhare, Aged about 12 years, Respondent no.4 SE 5 are minor through natural guardian mother namely Smt.Rameshwari Bai, Both R/Q Rani Tarai, P.8.- Deori, Distt. Durg-fC.G.) MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OFMOTOR _VEHIELES^Ad_^_ 9 s' ^ 5.. -l-1 Sf'fl d^ HI6H COURT OF CHHATHSS^RH AT BIL4SPUR DIVISIONBENCH: HON'BLE MR. I.M.QU&DUSI & HON'BLE MR.SUL^M MINHAJUDDIN. JJ Apoellant Respondents M.A. [cl NQ.Z54/2010 The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Naushad A\\ © Rana & others Present: Mr. Honuman Prosad Agarwal, Advocate for the oppellcint. Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate for the respondents No.l A 2. None appeared for the other respond?nts despite second call. ORDER (Orall (20th September. 2011) I.M. Quddusi. J; 1. Heard. 2. The appellant-Insunmce Compony has filed this appeal against the award dated 24.11.2009 passed by the tearned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (FTC), Balod, District Durg (for short "the Ctaims Tribunal') in Claim Case No.16/09. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the claimants, who are widow & children of deceased Mo^iesh Kumar Lonhare, have filed a claim application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the Act, 1988') before the Claims Tribunal seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.34,50,000/- for the deathof said Mohesh Kumar, who died in a motor accid&nt which took place on 25.1.2009 when the Bolero Jeep bearing registration C617-D-0809, in which the deceased was comin9 from Keshkaal to Jagdalpur, was overturned due to rash and negligent driving by its driver. The claimants. ho.ve claimed compensation on the ground that they were dependent on the deceased, who was the sole eaming member in the famity, and due to his death, they have suffered loss of income. 4. The Claims Tribunal vide impugned award allowed the claim application of the claimants, awarded a sum of Rs.9,01,120/- along with ihterest at the ^-•./ '£Sr'^S^^:.^£^ i£~*~~^^SS^S!~i. "\ rate of 6% p.a. and fastened liability on the q)pellant herein to satisfy the impugned award. 5. We have heard leamed counsel for the parties. We have also perused the records of the Claims Tribunal. 6. From perusal of the record, it is revealed that vehicle in which the deceased was traveling was occupied by the police officiats for the purpose of 9overnment duty i.e. in the programme of 26 Jcnuary, that is to say, that the vehicle was taken on hire and if it so, then as per provisions of Sections 168 & 169 of the Act, 1988 & Rule 226 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, the Claims Tribunal should have summoned the Superintendent of Police or cny official from the office of the Collector concerned along with record to ascertain the true and;.e.prrect position, but the same has not been done in the present case and therefore, at this stage it cannot be held that the vehicle in question was being taken on hire or not and wasbemg used as a private vehicle and the police personnel were sitting in the said vehicle as private passengers or not. In these circumstances, we feel that matter requires reconsideration at the end of the Claims Tribunal. 7. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed, impugned brder is set aside and the matt-er is remitted back to the Claims Tribunal for decision afresh. The Claims Tribunal shall first ascertain the true and correct position by conducting om enquiry as provided under Sections 168 & 169 of the Act, 1988 and Rules226 of the Motor Vehicles Rules omd thereafter only fix the liability. The Claims Tribunal shall also provide opportunity to the parties to adduce further evidence, if any, or to call/recall the witnesses, amend the pleadings or to file documents or verify the documents already filed. The Claims Trihiunal shatl also issue summons to the owner of the vehicle as none appeared on behalf of her before this Court despite service. 8. The parties are directed to qipear before the Claims Tribunal concerned on 3 November. 2011. The Registry is directed to trdnsmit record of the Claims Tribunal concerned without further delay. No oi-deiLSSj^costs. "•\.: ^' ^';':~~^. G. Minhajuddin Sd/- LM-Quddusi Judge