i ^^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH1 M.A.fC) No. f2^5~' j)f2PK) ilm^ri APPELLANT NON-APPLICANT No.l The New India Insurance Co.Ltd. 11/50, Ex. NTPC Colony, Rihandnagar, 231233 District Sonbhadra (U.P.) Versus RESPONDENTS (:1) Kalawati Widow of Ramashanker aged about 23 years, Caste \^?.y"ffP) Rajwar ft e v ^ u' .& .^e'!l .-A^?:'eh 6^'^'' ^•^y^'^2) Ku.Pushpa D/o. Late Ramashanker aged about 08 years, i-;3) Suraj, son of Late Ramashanker aged about 04 years, ^ :4) Durgawati, Ramashanker years, D/o. Late aged about 4 ^:5) Smt. Ramadevi W/o. late Ghooran aged about 55 years, All Caste Rajwar, R/o. Village Kenapara, Post Karanji, Police Chowki Karanji, Police Station Jainagar, Tahsil Surajpur, District Surguja (C.G.) Respondlents/applicants No.2 to 4 minors, through their natural guardian Mother Kalawati, Respondent No. 1 CLAIMANTS V-:6 Smt. Sukhmen W/o. Donde aged 45 years, R/o. Village Kirwil, Post Dudhi, District Sonbhadra (U.P.) NON-APPLICANT No.2 "/C£^j :7) Shoukat, S/o. Ilpas Quraishi, aged about 25 years, R/o. Village Patpariya, Ward No.07, Post Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) NON-APl.^~^wa^o.3 \-i8) Shailesh Jaiswal, S/o. Shivnarayan Jaiswal, aged about 35 years, R/o. Village Jhumarpara, Police Station Jainagar, Chowki Karanji, District Surguja (C.G.) NON-APPLICANT No.4 APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT. ff-Xias HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR DB: HON'BLE I.M. QUDDUSI & HON'BLE G. MINHAJUDDIN, JJ MISC. APPEAL (C ) No. 205/2010 Vs. RESPONDENTS Kalawati and others. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988 APPEARANCE: Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, courtsel for the appellant. Mr. D.N. Prajapati, counsel for respondents No. 1 to 5. Ms. Neha Verma, counsel for respondents No. 6 to 8. ORDER (ORAU (23rd August,2011) Perl.M.QUDDUSI.J, This appeal has been filed by the appellanVinsurance company against the award dated 10.11.2009 passed by the II Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (FTC), Surajpur, Distt. Surguja (C.G) (in short "the Tribunal") in Claim Case No. 174/07, so far as it relates to fastening of liability upon the appellanVinsurance ' company to pay compensation. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 30.6.2006 at about 6 pm Ramashankar was coming on his motorcycle in between Dhartipara and Kenapara. At that time, respondent No.7 was coming from opposite direction by driving a tractor rashly and negligently and dashed the motorcycle of Ramashankar, as a result, Ramashankar sustained grievous injuries over his head APPELLANT The New India Insurance Co. Ltd. District Sonbhadra (U.P.) Non-Applicant No.1 ^fSS ^^ f€.11 s% ® •2- ^ r-^?^^ j?' ^, '^^.^ A "%:'»Ssy vv^ and other parts of the body and died during the course of treatment. 3. At the time of accident, the deceased was 30 years and he was earning Rs.80,000/- p.a. from agriculture and business. Therefore, the claimants, who are his wife, childrenand mother, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short "the Act, 1988") for a total compensation of Rs.61,30,000/- under various heads for the death of Ramashankar. 4. However, learned Tribunal, after hearing counsel for the pari:i,es and on close scrutiny of the evidence, oral and documentary, on record, by the impugned award granted a total compensation of Rs.4,15,000/-, fastening the ligbility upon the appellanVinsurance company. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the part:ies, perused the Lower Court Record (LCR) as also the impugned award. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company has submitted that the Tribunal has failed to appreciate that the applicant/claimant Kalawati, wife of the deceased, had informed the Superintendent of Police, Surajpur, Distt. Surguja, vide application dated 14.8.2006, which is Ex.P/19, about the - accident, inwhich name ofthe driverwas mentioned as Naresh @ Baua, Caste-Rajwar, R/o Village-Navapara (Karanji) and nothing was mentioned regarding the type of vehicle. Whereas in the postmortem report as well as in the merg intimation, the type of vehicle, by which the accident had taken place, was mentioned as motorcycle, but the vehicle involved in the U"7 accident, as mentioned by the Tribunal and in the claim petition, was tractor. However, name of the driver of the tractor was not Naresh, but Shoukat Ali Qureshi, which is quite different. Though objections were raised by the insurance company, but in the impugned award, it has been mentioned by the Tribunal that no objection was raised. 7. In view of above,,,we are the opinion that the material evidence available on record has not been considered atall, which was liable to be considered and a'decision was liable to be taken on the basis of material available on record. 8. It was the duty of the Tribunal also to conduct an enquiry as contemplated under Sections 168 and 169 of the Act, 1988 and Rule 226 of the CG Motbr Vehicle Rules, 1994, for ascertaining truth for the purpose of awarding just and proper compensation. However, the same has not been done in the present case.The Tribunal should not have treated the claim petition as a civil suit. 9. Thus, in these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the matter requires reconsideration at the end of the Tribunal for decision afresh. 10. In the result, we allow this appeal in part, set aside the impugned award and remit the matter back to the Tribunal for decision afresh in the light of observations made above. The findings given in the impugned award shall not be taken into consideration while recording findings afresh. 11. Needless to mention that the Tribunal shall provide opportunity to the parties to amend the pleadings, adduce further evidence, if any, file the documents or get the documents verified etc., and •sastww-as f^^ B Z5J tsg-^ thereafter it shall decide the claim petition afresh at the earliest in light of the observations made herein above. 12. Parties shall appear before the Tribunal on 29th September, 2011. 13. The records of the Tribunal shall be sent back without further delay. 14. No order as to costs. 15-£ertjfiedcopy as per rules. SA'- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge ^ aS^