s'su= L ^''r IN THE HONBLE HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILAPSUR Misc. Auneal {C} No. t5'4>^ /2008 APPELLANT [':'*? ^^ Branch Manager, Royal Sundaram ''.' L,.S>-'-A ^;"5^^- RESPONDENTS 7^ 'X';- Alliance Insurance Company Limited, First Floor, Chawla Chambers, Above U.T.I. Bank, Jeevan Bima Marg, Pandri, Raipur (C.G.) JINSURES} VERSUS 1) Suresh Dewangan, S/o Prabhakar Dewangs.n, aged about 25 years, R/o Karbala Road, Juna Bilaspur Tahsil 85 District Bilaspur (C.Ci.) {CLAIMANTS} 2) Smt. Priti Tiwari W/o Shri Ravi Tiwari, R/o Near Commissioner Bungalow, 27 Kholi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) {OWNERj 3j Naresh Kumar Banjare S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad Banjare, aged about 26 years, R/o Om Nagar, Jarahabhata, District Bilaspur (C.G.) {DRIVER} MEMORANDUM OF APP^AL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988 AS AMENDED BY ACT OF 1994 y § HQN'BLE MR. I.M. iw ^^ ktffiifc '*aa- /2-8 Roya sundaram Jliance Aiii?yjaii»-.s: \^^i pany Limited. Vs Suresh Dewanaan & zothers ps-sa<a^as^i-= Mr. Sachin Singh Rajput, Advocate for the appeiiant. Mr. Gautam Khetrapa!, AdvocaSe for respondent No.l Mr. S.K. Mishra, Advocate for respondent No.2. 7' ?&.«&.•»,S.AS" '5 l^ ^ rt f £,WAW 1. Heard. 2. The appeiiant-lnsurance Companv has tiled ttiis against the award dated 25.08.2008 passed in Claim Case Mo.94/2007 wherebv the learned 6 Additlonal Motor Accident Ciaims Tribunai, Bilaspur (CG) has awarded a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- to the claimant holdina the appeilant Insurance company liable to satisfy the award. 3. Brief facts of the case are that in the intervening nigiit or 14" 8- 15tn 3une, 2006 the claimant a'ong wlth his frlend was returnina to Bllaspur from Plparlya in the Bolero beartna realstration number CG10-F-0460. Due to rash and neallaent driving by the drivsr of the vehicle, it has met with an accident as a result of which the claimant sustained serious Iniuries. He was admltted in the •emetara hospital and looking to his crltical condition, he was referred to Apollo Hospital, Biiaspur where he was operated and a rod has been inserted in hls neck. On account of said accident, the claimant has sustalned permanent disability as spinai cord of the claimant has been damaged due to whlch he is not able to move both his hands. Accordinaiy, the clalmant has claimed an amount of R.s.19,50,000/- as compensation. The tribunal on the basis of the pieadings of the parties, rramed as many as 4 issues and atter hearina the parties In the matter aiiowed ths cialm petition of the claimant and awarded a sum of Rs.4,50,000/-. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the trlbunal has wrongly heid that the clalmant was thlrd party. He further argued that the tribunal ought to have held that the vehicle was beina used as taxi for hire and reward and as such, there was gross violation of the oolicy conditions. He further argued that the trlbunal has directed that if the amount awarded Is not paid within the stipulated period, penal interest @ 12% was to be paid. However, there is no provision for any penal interest and the only provislon relating to Interest is Section IIOCC of the Act. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents have supported the impuaned award. 'We have heard iearned counsei for the parties ai the impugned award as also the record of tribunal below. It is admittsd case that the gratuitous passenger was covered undsr the insurance policy. Even In the evidence the injured himseif has stated that he had gone to attend the Baraat of hls friend in the vehicle in question. The owner of the vehicie has also stated in his examination that he had given his vehicie to Ganesh Gupta, a ciose friend, and not aiven the same on hire. Contrary evldence from the side of the appellant was not produced in this regard and therefore It cannot be presumed that the vehlcle in question was being used for commerciai purpose. Therefore. we are of the oplnlon that there Is no iileaalltY or Improprlety In the impugned award passed by the tribunal and the appeal Is liable to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissed. So far as the penal interest awardecl by the tribunal is concerned, we are of the view that same is to be set aside. e ciaims ^ . Accordingly, the award dated 25.8.2008, so far as it reiates to imposition of penal interest is concerned, the same is hsreby set aslde. The ciaimant shall oniy be entitied for simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the appiication tiil the actual payment is made. part to the extent Indicated ippeal is allowed in above. No order as to cost Roshan/- Sd/- I-M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge