c^ i.r/- IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A. (C) No.- ^ ^o /2009 APPELLANT n 's?< fi'i?i'' ^ .bi^-i'h wk"7', ^^^.^^^' i.ati THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, TAHSIL, DISTRICT - DURGP. B. -51, MALVIYA NAGAR, DURG C.G. (RESPONDENT N0.- 5 IS DRIVER OF VEHICLE TRUCK N0.- C.G. 07 Z.C.2366, RESPONDENT NO.-6 IS OWNER AND APPELLANT IS INSURANCE COMPANY) Vrs. RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANTS :- ^ 1. SMT. BHUPENDER KAUR W/0 LATE KULJEET SINGH BHATIAAGE 31 YRS. ^ 2. YASH BHATIA S/0 LATE KULJEET SINGH BHATIAAGE 9 YRS. i 3. BANI BHATIA D/0 LATE KULJEET SINGH BHATIAAGE 3 & HALF YRS. 6^4. SMT. RAJINDER BHATIA W/0 LATE NARENDRA SINGH BHATIA, ALL RESIDENT OF - 35/C, MALVIYA NAGAR DURG, FOR RESPONDENT N0.- 2 & 3 GUARDIAN MOTHER BHUPENDER KAUR RESPONDENTS/NON-APPLICANTS:- 5. YUVRAJ SAHU S/0 RAMESHWAR SAHU, AGE 47 YRS., RESIDENT OF GANJPARA, DIPARAPARA DURG 6. NARESH KUMAR S/0 KUNDAR SINGH AGE 43 YRS., RESIDENT OF KELABADI DURG APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEmCLE ACT 1988 APPEALVALUED Rs. 14,49,6387- (APPEALBYINSURANCE) COMPENSATION CLAEVIED BEFORE TRFBUNALRs. 1,48,60,000/- AWARDED AMOUNT BY TRIBUNAL Rs. 14,49,638/- HIGH COURT OF CHHAjmSGARH^^ILASPUR "^ M. A~No. 230 of 2009 Appellant The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Versus Respondents Snit. Bhupender Kaur 8s others APPEAL UNDER SECTIQK 173_OF THE MOTOR_yEH_ICLESACT, 1988 DB: Hon'ble Shri I.M. Quddusi 8s Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ Shri Sudhir Agarwal, Advocate for the appellant. . Shri Gautam Khetrapal, Advocate for the respondents No. 1 to 4. None for the respondent No.5. Shri Shashank Thakur, Advocate for the respondent No.6. ORDER (Oral) ( Passed on this 3rd day ofJanuaiy, 2011 ) Per I. M. Quddusi, J. 1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant/Insurance Company on the ground of ratio of contributory negligence as well as on quantum against the impugned award dated 24.12.2008, passed by the Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg in Claim Case No. 133/2008, awarding a sum ofRs. 14,49,638/-. 2 . We have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1 to 4 and respondent No. 6 and perused the lower Court record as well as the findings given in the impugned award. 3. Brief facts, in nutshell, are that deceased Kuljeet was engaged in the business of transportation and supply of building material and he was owner of Babloo Motors. On 19.1.2008 at 5.00 p.m. in the evening he was crossing the road in front of his shop, at that time -•^. f '-^ the Truck, bearing registration No. C.G. 7 ZC/2366, being driven in a rash and negligent manner hit Kuljeet, as a result of this accident he received grievous injuries and later on succumbed to the injuries in the hospital. The claimants, being legal heirs of the deceased, filed a claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for award of a total compensation of Rs. 1,48,60,OOQ/- undervarious heads. Learned Claims Tribunal, having regard to the facts and evidence on record held that the claimants are entitled for compensation to the tune ofRs. 19,32,850/-. However, holding that it was a case of contributory negligence and the deceased was also responsible to the extent of25% of negligence, deducted a sum ofRs. 4,83.212/- and thereby awarded a sum of Rs. 14,49,638/- as compensation along with simple interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition and accordingly passed the impugned award. However, it has been directed that if the amount of award is not deposited within two months, the amount of conipensation shall carry interest at the rate of 8% per annum. The respondents No. 1 to 4/claimants ha.ve also filed cross appeal (I.A.No.5 dated 23.3.2010) for enhancement of the award and setting aside of that part of the award wherein it is held by the Claims Tribunal that the deceased had contributed in the accident to the extent of 25%. Having regard to the facts situation and the evidence on record we do not find any reason to interfere with the quantuni of award and the findings in regard to the ratio of contributory negligence. However, we feel that the award ofpenal interest at the rate of8% per annum is excessive and in our opinion the Tribunal should '^ ^,- 'd .^., • x '•'"\.rf~ have awarded the simple interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. 7. In view of the above, we allow this appeal in part and modify the impugned award dated 24.12.2008 to the extent that the amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal shall carry simple interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition. Rest of the conditions of the award shall remain intact. Consequently, the cross appeal filed by the respondents No. 1 to 4/claimsnts is dismissed. No order as to costs. SA'- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge Thakur