IN THE HI^^OlJI^W^^^l^AH-UREI^ MISG APPEAL(cyJNQ.^ RESPONDENTS Claimantg Driver of vehicle Oriental Insyr L i m ifed, th roug h Bran c h Ma^ South Gango^ District Durg.- | • BaiJ wi.dow o^^^^ bevlal Sahu, aged^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ a ^YeQr:S..:',^: ;'.,':.:1.';.':;.'^ 2^JJttam, son olf Late f)evlal Sdhu, ag ed a b o ut 8| year s. 3^Q\pa^^^^^@^^^^^^^^^^ Late D^ v 1 a 1 | S a h u, ag e d a b o ut years. j 4. Mukesh, son of Late Devlal Sahu, aged a|bout 4 years. No.2 to 4 ane minors^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ fheir nQtural guardi N o. 1 -S mt. P us h pa Ba i 5. Smt. B i ta w G n B a i, w if e of 5 h r i Shambhu SQihu, aged^^^^^^^^^^ - years. i , 6. Shambhu Sahu, son of Kartik /<^':;..1/.''':;;: l''/;::';'.'1 '1:'^ Ram; aged ab o ut 6 5 years. Respondent NQ.I to 6 are res i d ents of V i 11 ag e t KhAtnarj yo, Teshil Berld, Distr^i^ 7.,^^qdish, son o^^^^^^^^^^M aged dbbuf ]38 y of \/i\\age Qodha, ^e.sh\^^^^^^^^^^^ ^istrict Du •;:<:l3illlltJ^MKS81211fil%fiJ:l^ IW APPEAL^NDEft SECTI^N^^^^^I^^ AGT, 1988 ^A&AtNS^^^^^^^^^^^T 11.3.2008 ^P^SSEblB^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ACCID6NT CLAIMS TRtBUNAL,^^^^^^^^& bUR^ (PRE5IDED GVER By'SHR^^^^ CLArAA CASE NQ.36/07 j ^'. • ! . \ l ' '- '•• 11.11.1 Owner of vehi^ 8. Ra^ l^'';:'^'.,.:'l:':';t:'/'^^^ age^^^ pf residerits.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Q •; Khdmariya/^^^^ j bistrict Ourg. HIGH COURT OP CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR DB: HON'BLE LM.QUDDUSI & HON»BLEPRA8HANT KUMAR MI8HRA, JJ M. Afc»Io. 1037 OF 2008 0 ^...f c Vs. APPBALUNDBRSECTION 173 OFTHB MOTOR VBHICLBSACT. 1988 APPBARANCE Mr. G,S. Patel, counselfor fhe appeUant Mr. Sudhir Verma, coiuisel for respondents 7 & 8. None for fhe claioiaats/respondents 1 to 6. ORDBRtORALl (31.03.2011) Per I.M. QUDDUSI, J (1) This appeal has been filed by fhe iasurer agamst fhe impugned award dated 11.03.2008 passed by fhe II Additional Motor Accident Clauiis Tnbuual (FTC), Jashpiir (C.G) m Claiai Case No. 37/2007 whereby the UabiUty has been fixed on fhe appellaat also for payment of corapeusation. (2) Brieffacts offhe case as per the version ofttie claimants are that on 04.06.2007 deceased Deolal aiid ofhers hadgojie to work as labourersunderuon-appUcantNo.2.In fhe night, fhey were goiag to a brick kUn situated ia Maagalore on Tractor TroUy beariag Regia. No.C.G.007-D/7467 and 7468. On fhe way, at about 10.30 p.ia, near village Maagalore fhe said Tractor Trolley niet wifh accident due to rash aad neglugent driviag of its driver fhat is respondenf no.7, as a result of which, Deolal, who was sitting on the Trolley suddei^ly feU down aad was pressed under fhe TroUey. He sustaiaed serious iajuries aad died on fhe way when he was brought to Beinetara Hospital. At the tmie of accident, fhe deceased was aged about 32 years. He was doiag APPELLANT Onental InsiiraGLce Company Liniited RESPONDBNTS ^Pushpa Bai aiid ofhers agricultural works aiid labour works and was eamiag Rs.150/- per day. The claimaats bemg dependents/legal representatives have filed clami petition for fhe award of compensation to fhe toLine of Rs. 16,75,OOO/- on various heads ia Ueu ofdeatli ofthe deceased. (3) The leained claiois Tribunal has held tfiat respondent No.7 drove fhe said Tractor Trolley ia a rash aad negUgent nianner aiid coniiaitted the accident, as a result of which^ Deolal has died; tiiere was breach of conditions of iasuraace poMcy aad at fhe tirae of accident, respondent no.7 was having valid aiid eflTective driviag Ucence. The Tnbuiial has awarded a total compensation of Rs.4,22,500 which fhe clamiaiifs ai'e entitied to receive froia fhe non-applicaats joiafly or severally. (4| We have heard leamed counsel for the parties aad have also gone through fhe records of the Tribunal. There was a Kisaa package poUcy of fhe Tractor. No extra premiuai was paid for aay occupaat. The deceased was travelmg ia TroUey bearmg Regn.No. C.G.007-D/7468, where no sitting capacity was available, Therefore, atlowiag fhe deceased to sit ui fhe Trolley was clearly a breach of condition of tlie PoMcy aad fherefore, the Insurance Coinpaay caanot be held liable to pay fhe coinpensation. (51 In view offhe above, we aUow fhis appeal, set aside flie part of fhe award by which fhe Insuraace Compaay has been held Uable to pay compensation. However, it wIU be open for fhe claiiriants to execute fhe award aad reaUze the amount of compensation from the owner offlie Tractor-TroUey, (6) The amount already in deposit shall be refanded to fhe nisuraace Conipaay. lu case fhe amount has ah'eady been disbursed to fhe claiinaiits, it wUl be open for the Insuraace Conipaiiy to recover the saoie from the owaer oftlie vehicle. No order as to costs. ——— Rao Sd/- LM.Quddusi Judge Sd/- Prqshant Kumar Mishra Judge