^ Oivision Bend IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUI Misc. Appeal (C) No. 53-3 /2011 APPELLANT fNon-Applicant No.21 RESPONDENTS ^The Oriental Irisurance Co. Ltd., Through its Sr. Divisional Manager, Divisional Office- Geetanjali Bhawan, Main Road, K&rba (C.G.). Versus :1. 2< Vijay Singh, S/o Pratap Singh, aged about 33 years, Satyenara, S/o Shri Vijay Singh, aged 9 years, Minor, 3-' Bhupendra, S/o Shri Vijay Singh, aged about 7 years, Note: Respondents No. 2 and 3 are minors and are represented through their father and naturai guardian Respondent No.l, Ali are by caste Gond and residents of viilage Sawanrawan, P.S. Patna, Tahsil Baikunthpur, Distt. Koria (C.G.). .Claimants 4. , .Dhan Singh, S/o Late Sitaram GoncT, aged about 52 years, <5ccupation Service (C.S.E.B.), permanent r/o village and P.S. Ramanujnagar (Shrinagar), Tahsil Surajpur, Distt. Sarguja (C.G.).............Owner-cum-DnVer \^^ APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT.1988. r HIGH^OURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR DB: Hon'ble I. M. QUDDUSI & Hoa'Me Q. 5IINHAJUDDIN, JJ APPELLANT: RESPONDENTS: [.A|0. Np. 539/2011 • The Oriental Insuraace Co. Ltd Vs. Vijay Siagh aud others MISC. APPBAL UNDER SECTIONJ.73 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES fT 10! ,rvr bV^* , Appearance: . Mr. Rataa Pusty, counsel for the AppeUaiit. Mr. D. N. Prajapati, counsel for respondents 1 to 3. Mr. Arul Gulati, counsel for respondent no.4. ORAL ORDER (15.12.2011) Per I.M. QUDDUSI, J, Heard. 2. This appeal has been filed by tiie Insuraace Coin.pais.y agaiast fhe ijnpugned awani dated 25.01.2011 passed by the leamed Motor Accident Claiins Tribunal Baikunfhpur, District Koria (C.G) in. Claun Case No.06/2008 in so far as it has fastened - tiabUity upou fhe Insuraace Coiupaay as weU. as qiiantuin. 3. Brief facts of the case as per the version of ftie clamiants are fhat on 30.08.2007 degeased Aarti was traveluig on m.otorcycle bearing Regn.No.C.G.l5-E/2072 as piUion rider whUe it was beiug driven by respondent No.4 (o^vner). They were goiag froin Patna to Basaiipara Sarbhoka. On fhe way at about 3.00 p.in., due to rash and negKgent driviug of respondent no.4, she feU down aiid sustained grievous injury. Y l'sts>£' -.»8fs ••'^^.^(.^S*''" Mo 5. 6. She was aduiitted ia District Hospital, Baikunfhpur where she died duriag fhe course of treatiiient. The deceased was aged about 25 years aad was eaming Rs.5000/- per inontll bv doiae labour aad aaricultaral works. The clamiaats beiag dependents/legal representatives have filed claim petition u/s 166 of fhe Motor Vehicles Act, for fhe award of a total conipensation ofRs. 23,80,000/- onvanous heads. The learaed Clatms Tribunal haviug regard to the facts situation has held that due to rash aad negligent driving of Motorcycle bearmg No.C.G.15-E/2072 by respondent no.4, fhe accident took place, as a result of which, Sint. Arti who was sitting as pilUon rider died aad fhe claunauts are entifled to get a total coiupensation of Rs.5,06,000/- fi-oni fhe appellant and respondent uo.4. We bave heard leamed counsel for fhe parties and have also ;one fhrough ffae records. The leamed Motor Accidents Clainis Tribuiial has fastened liabiUly upon fhe appellaat iusurance Coiupatty on fhe basis of preiniuiu uieutioned as extra PA of Rs.14/- received by the Insuraace Company ia addition to the PA of Rs.50/- in the policy. Ao- appUcation has been filed for taking additional docuiuents which is the exfract of fhe Indiaa Motor TarifF ./."- (IMT). Learaed counsel for the appeUant has subiuitted that Endorsement IMT 18 would be appUcable but Clause 4 where IMT 18 has been refen-ed shows that Motomed Two Wheelers with OT without side car fusedfor hire or reward): For unncaned hirer/driver. Bndorsement I 31 T - 18 is to be nsed and the annudl premhim in case of death, 100% of capital sion insured ,'\ ff 1 ''•w^.c.^f, r; '%.. ^E.I,".^-'''' ,^ ^'sCS"4'"' < '^ <. has been mentioned. The premiztm for every unit of CSI of Rs.10,000/- or part thereof in case of two vjheelers has been mentioned as Rs.7/- but fhis would not be ia case of piIUon rider as fhe two wheeler has not been shown to be taken on hire or reward aad iu the iasurance policy, it has been nientioued fhat the policy covers the use of the vehide for any purpose other than (b)/ carriage ofgoods (other than samples or personcd luggage)/(c) organized radng /(d) pace making/ (e) Speed testing/ (f) Reliability Trials/fg) Any pttfpose in connecHan udth Mofor Trade fa) hire or reward. other than. the purpose of drivitig tuition and fherefore fhis document filed as additional docuiaent would not be relevant for the purpose oftakiag premiuBa. as extra PA ofRs.14/- in addition tothe PAofRs.50/-. In view of fhe above, we are of the opiaion fhat a clanficatioa regardiiig Rs.14/- taken as preinium. should be sought and fhe burden of proof in fhis regard is upon fhe Insurance Compaay. If tliere was any Ijinited liabflity they have to show ofherwise it wffl be deeined fhat PA of Rs.50/- was taken for urdimited Uability in respect ofpiUion rider. Fiirtlier witti regard to quaatuia, the deceased was niarried aud her personal and living- expenses were deducted as V+ which is agaiast ffae latg,Jaid down by Hon'ble the Supreiae Coiu-t ia Sarla Verma (Smt.) -vs- Selhi Transport Corporatlon. <ind another reported in. (2009) 6 SCC 121. In view of the above, we are of fhe OTOUUOU that the niatter requires reconsideiation at the end of fhe Tribunal. Hence, we aUow fhis appeal ia part, set aside fhe impugned award aad remit the inatter back to the Tribunal for decisiou afresh in fhe •a '^ ''$€ (-•*• !."•. 1"%., '^ ^ r> 11. light of the observations inade above. The parties shaU appear before fhe Tribunal on 31st Jauuarv 2012. Needless to inention fhat the claun petition would be disposed of afresh as early as possible preferably within a period of 3 nionths froin fhe date of appearance of the parties. The records of the Tnbunal shall be sent back without furfher delay. In the result, fhis appeal is allowed in part at fhe inotion stage. No oider as to cost. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge BS Rao