® \<. INTHEHON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A.(C)No. .LU^ OF 39STl~2_oo-g CAPPEAL VALUED AT Rs^.3,69,500/-) APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLESACT. 1988 APPELLANT (Non- Applicant No. 3) RESPONDENTS (ApplicantNO.l) (APPLICANT N0.2) (APPLICANT N0.3) (APPLICANT N0.4) 4. (NON-APPLICANT'NO.l) 5 (NON-APPLICANT N0.2) g '•^ ^.'-- • ^' United India Insurance Company Limited, Through Branch Manager, Kamthi Line, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS Smt. Kamla Bai, Widow of Bhagirathi Sahu, aged about 25 years, Nikhil Sahu son of Late Shri Bhagirathi Sahu, Through- Mother-Natural Guardian- Smt.Kamla Bai (Respondent No.l) Manohar son of Bisesar Sahu, aged about 50 years, Pusai Bai wife of Manohar Sahu, aged about 48 years, Respondent No. 1 to 4 are R/o- Village Khuteri, Police Station Somni, Tahsil and District Rajnandgapn (C.G.) Chabilal son of Sakharam Sahu, aged about 24 years, Sakharam son of Hiralal Sahu, aged about 40 years, Respondent No. 5 SE 6 both resident of.Village Khuteri, Police Station Somni, Tahsil and District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) &^t:-' B-yss HIGH COURT OF CTIHATHSeARH. BILASPUR DB: Hon'bleI.M.QUDDUSI & Hon'bleMANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, JJ APPEULANT: RESPONDENTS: M.A.JCLNo^ 172/2008 United India Coinpaay Limited Vs. • , Sint. Kamla Bai aad others .».. \~. '< MXSC. APPE&L UNDBRSECnON 173 OF THE MOTORVEHICLES ACT,A988 '":^,::^:'rl:;.-'1 ,::'1 Appearance: :^ ; ; Mr. Dashrath. Gupta, counsel for fhe appellaut. None for flie respondents though served. Pea-J.M^QUDDirai^J, ORAl.ORDER (os.os.aoii) 1. List is being revised. Case is again called out. No one appears on behatf of fhe respondehts despite service of notice. Therefore, we proceed against fhe respondents. 2. This appeal has been filed by fhe Insurance Coinpany against fhe iitipugued award dated 28.07.2007 passed by Ist Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajnaudgaon (C.G) in Claua Case No.36/2006 on fhe question ofliability as also quantum.. 3. The appeUaut had got permission. u/s 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act. 4. Brief facts of the case as per the version of the clauiianfs are ' fhat ou' 14.03.2006 deceased Bh^irafh was traveliag on Motorcycle •beaFmg Regn. No. C.G.Q8-F/5754 as a piUion / 10 i ?.. rider, while it was being driven by respondent no.5 Chhabilal, who is owner of the Motorbike. They were going to Devad by the said inotorcycle. On the way when fhe niotorcycle reached to Kallu Dhaba, aa uiiknown Truck came froin back side, tried to over-take fhe motorcycle aud ia tbis process fhe Truck came by the side of inotorbike aad bofh the Track and Motorbike were nuuung side by side aud dashed with each other, as a result of which the inotorcycle feU down at a distaut place aad pillion rider Bhagirafh sustauied grievous iajiuies. After fhe said accident, the offendiag Truck raa away. The deceased was iaitially adinitted in District Hospital Rajnandgaon aad due non- availabUity of proper treatment, he was brought to Chandulal Chaadrakar Hospital, Bhilai, where he died durmg the course oftoreatment on 15.03.2006. At the tiine of accident, the deceased was aged about 27 years; he was workiag ia Kamal Solvent, Soiani and was eaming Rs.3000/- per month. The claimaTits being dependents/legal heirs have ffled claun. petition u/s 163-A of fhe Motor Vetucles Act, 1988 for fhe award ofcompensation to the tune ofRs. 7,71,0001- on vanous heads. Leamed Clauns Tnbuiial has held that Bhagirafh died when fhe Motorcycle bearing Regn.No.C.G.08-F/5754 was in use and met with aa accident on 14.03.2006 and there was no breach of poUcy conditions. It has awarded a total compensation of Rs.3,69,500/- with iaterest @ 6% per jinmim 'nritTim two laonfhs from. the date of award, failJTig which fh.e- said amount shaU cany penal interest @ 9% per amiUDi. ^ . >\~. 6. Though a groitnd in the appeal was taken by the Insuraace Coinpaay that Ihe risk of the piUion rider was uot covered under fhe iasuraace policy, but Mr. Dashrath Gupta, leamed counsel appeanng on behalf of fhe iasurance conipany, veiy fairly subinitted that he is not pressiag ttus ground onaccount of recent circiilar dated 25,11.2009 of the Head Qffice, New' Delhi as the vehicle was iasiu-ed under Motor Package PoUcy also caUed as Goiuprehensive PoUcy. Circular dated 25th Noveniber, 2009 issued by the Head Ofi5.ee ofthe Insurance Coinpaay reads as under: t^" ^.'^ \~. THE QRIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., HEAD OFFICE, NEW DELHI DEPTT.: MOTOR dated 25th November, 2009 CIRCULAR N0.HO/ MOT(u/w)/ 282/2008-09/ CR-6473 CIRCULAR TO ALL BOs/Dos/ROs, I.A.D-, vigilance Deptt. IT DEFrr. OSTC., ALL DEPTTS. OF H.O. & C.M.D'S SECTT./SERVtCE CENTRE AT HANSALAYA & HYDERABAD. LIABILITY OF INSURANCE CQMPA ES IN RESPECT OF OCCUPANT OFA PRFVATE CARAND PILLION RIDER IN A TWO WHEELER UNDER STANDARD MOTOR PACKAQE POLICY (ALSO CALLED COMPREHENSIVE POLICY). We have received Circular No.IRDA/NL/CIR/ F&U/ 073/11/2009 dt. 16.11.2009 fixim IRDA whereby it is coiifirmed fhat insured's liabitity ia respect of occupant carried ia a Private Car aad PilUon Ridcr carried on 2 wheeler is covered under fhe Standard Motor Package Policy. IRDA has furfher conflcttied that vide various Circiilars issued afber detariff of Motor, tbere has been no change in fhe scope offhe staadard covers. A copy ofthe Circular is enclosed for record & ready reference. The tenns ofthe cover as per the Motor Package Policy for Private Cars aad 2-wheeler as given ia Pplicy wording Sectiorr 2.1(i) are veiy clear and are recouSrmed by fhe IRDA's. Circular. It is, fherefore, advlsed to muaediately review aU cases wh&e appeal has been ffled on fhe grounds that insurer is not, liable for occupants of Private Cars and PiUion Rider iu a 2-^yUeeler uiider the Motor Package Policy. -Ifthe appeal is based sofely on these groimds then it must be iminediately wifhdrawn. Iffhere are other grounds for fiting appeal then the case must be examiaed on nierits aad decision regarding continuation of appeal be taken by the Regional Manager conceraed. Lastty, it must be ensured fhat our ofBces desist finoni filing appeals on the grounds of Pillion Rider or occupaats of Private Car not being covered iinder Motor Package PoMcies. Kindly acknowledge receipt and confirm action taken regarding appeal cases to Head OfBce Motor Bepartiuent. Sd/- N. K. SINGH GENERAL MANAGER Eacl: As above 7. At fhis sfage, learaed counsel for fhe appeUaut submits fhat the Tribuiial has directed to pay the compensation of Rs. 3,69,500/- wifh siinple iaterest @ 6% per annum within two inonths fi-oiu the date of the award aad after fhe stipulated period the said amoiint shatl cany penal iaterest @ 9% per snTinm frois- the date of the claun application tiU fhe payxaent is inade. In our opinion, the peiial iu.terest im.posed by the Tnbuiial is aot appropriate; therefore, the award so far as it relates to only penal iaterest part is set aside. We duiect that the award shall cany simple iuterest @ 6% per annum through-out from. the date of the claun application tiU the date of realization. cy '< Eao -^ 8. In fhe result, fhe appeal is aUowed in part. The impugned award dated 28.7.2007 is modified to the above extent. No oid.er as to costs. ' Sd/.- l.M.Quddusl Judge Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge \'..