@ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J Appellants Claimants Ail residents of Misc Appeal (C) No.618 of 2010 1 Shambhu Nath Prasad, s/o Raja Prasad, a/a 40 years 2 Smt Ramawati Devi, w/o Shambhu Nath Prasad, a/a 38 years 3 Dewanti Devi, w/o late Pradip Prasad, a/a 21 years 4 Kavya Kumar, s/o Late Pradip Prasad, a/a 1 years through Dewanti Devi, w/o tate Pradip Prasad Village hakama, Post Bharatpura, Tahsjl Mahraj Ganj Kharsia, District Siwan (Bihar) Presently residing at village Bhagwan PurTahsil and District Raigarh (CG) VERSUS Respondents Rakesh Singh, s/o Kamla Kant Singh a/a 35 yers Cast Buihar, Occupation Owner and Driver, r/o Sangrampur, Thana Gautampur, District Siwan (Bihar) Presently residing at Village Patrapali, Jindalnagar, Tahsil and District Raigarh (CG) United India Insurance Co Ltd., Branch Office Raigarh, in front of Gopi Talkies Raigrh, Tahsil and District Raigarh (CG) Ajay Sahni, s/o Bajrang Sahni, a/a 23 years, Occupation - Driver, r/o Jogidampa, Raigarh, Tahsil and District Raigarh(CG) r' ^,-::-^^^ y^^"^ •/ 'S^.^ 1 'ifiS^. N %...^^/ MACNo.618 of 2010 € ^- Mohm Hussain, s/o Noor Mohar, a/a 32 years, Occupation - Owner (Tempo No.CG 13 A 6149, r/o Bidpara, Raigarh, near Chaiyyan Bhuiyaan Hotel, Raigarh, Tahsil and Djstrict Raigarh (CG) The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Branch Office, Behjndltwari Bazar, Raigarh, Tahsil and District Raigarh (CG) Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act Present : Shri Anumeh Shrivastava, counsel for the appellants. None for respondent No.1. Shri Dashrath Gupta, counsel for respondent No.2. Shri Manoj Jaiswal, eounsel for respondents No.3 and4. Shri HP Agrawal, counsel for respondent No.5. ORDER ^th (09mAugust,2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, CJ. This is claimants' appeal for modification/alteration of the award dated 25.01.2010, passed by the 3rd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raigarh (for short 'the Tribunal') in Claim Case No.38/2009. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.20,93,000/-, daimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate widow, minor son and parents of deceased Pradip Prasad by flling a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident i7 k MACNo.618 of 2010 />7 fc ^. on 18.05.2006 on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 12.05.2006, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.4,32,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Pradip Prasad died on 18.05.2006 on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 12.05.2006; the motorcyclist on whose Motorcycle deceased Pradip Prasad was travelling as pillion rider and the driver of the pther vehicle Autorickshaw bearing registration No.CG-13 /A 6149 contributed to the accident; the extent of their negligence was 20% and 80% respectively; as the above Autorickshaw was insured on the date of the accident with the Oriental Insurance Gompany Limited, and the risk of the pillion rider on the Motorcycle was not covered under the policy issued by the United India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the Autorickshaw was liable to pay 80% ofthe compensation assessed to the claimants and the remaining 20% of the compensation was payable by the owner of the Motorcycle to the claimants. 4) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.36,000/- towards personal expenses of the deceased, the claimant's dependency was assessed at Rs.24,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.24,000/- with the multiplier of 17, the compensation was worked out to r MACNo.618 of 2010 ^) c I^N^' Rs.4,08,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.24,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.4,32,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Pradip Prasad in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.4,32,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. The Tribunal directed the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the above Autorickshaw to pay 80% of Rs.4,32,000/-with interest to the claimants and the remaining 20% of Rs.4,32,000/- with interest was directed to be paid by the owner of the Motorcycle to the claimants. 5) Shri Anumeh Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appeltants submitted that though the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased; the claimants' dependency; selected the appropriate multiplier; and rightly assessed the compensation of Rs.4,32,000/- to be paid to the claimants, it has erred in exonerating the United India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the Motorcycle from its liability to pay 20% of Rs.4,32,000/- to the claimants as the Motorcycle was insured under a 'Package Policy' and in view of the Circular of IRDA in a Package Policy/Comprehensive Policy, the risk of the pillion rider on a Motorcycle is covered. 6) Shri Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.2 the United India Insurance Company Limited could not dispute that under the above Circular of IRDA, the risk of a pillion rider on a Motorcycle insured under a Package Policy/Comprehensive Policy •SSiN^'tliii~~-~ .^>' I l-ge?, I ^ v^^^^ ,1 IY -^/ c ^1«» MACNo.618 of 2010 ^^ is covered and as such, the finding recorded by the Tribunal leading to the exoneration of the insurer of the Motorcycle is liable to be set aside. 7) Shri Manoj Jaiswal, learned counsel for respondents No.3 and 4 the driver and owner of the Autorickshaw and Shri HP Agrawal, learned counsel for respondent No.5, the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the Autorickshaw supported the award. 8) The sole question involved in this appeal is Whether the risk of a pillion rider on a Motorcycle insured under a Package Policy/Comprehensive Policy is covered by virtue ofthe Circular of IRDA?' 9) It is not in dispute that the Motorcycle which was being driven by respondent No.1 Rakesh Sjngh and on which deceased Pradip Prasad was travelling as a pillion rider on the date of the accident was insured under a Package Policy/Comprehensive Policy. It is also not in dispute that in view of the Circular of the IRDA, the risk of a pillion rider on the Motorcycle insured under a Package Policy/Comprehensive Policy also is covered. As in the present case, the Motorcycle in question on which deceased Pradip Prasad was travelling as a pillion rider was insured under a Package Policy/Comprehensive Policy by virtue of the Circular of the IRDA, the risk of deceased Pradip Prasad was covered under the insurance policy (Ex.D/1). In this view of the matter, the finding recorded by the Tribunal leading to the exoneration of the United India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the Motorcycle {•• > ; II r' MACNo.618 of 2010 Q^) (: -r from its liability to pay 20% of the compensation assessed by the Tribunal is liable to be set aside and it is hereby set aside. We hold that the United India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the Motorcycle is liable to pay 20% of Rs.4,32,000/- assessed and awarded by the Tribunal to the claimants. 10) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/claimants is allowed in part. While maintaining the quantum of compensation of Rs.4,32,000/- awarded by the Tribunal and the direction to the Oriental Insurance Company Limited to pay 80% of the above compensation to the claimants, we modify/alter that part of the award which exonerates the United India Insurance Company Limited from its liability to pay 20% of Rs.4,32,000/- to the daimants and hold the insurer ofthe Motorcycle to pay that part of the compensation to the claimants. 11) Respondent No.2 the United India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing 20% of Rs.4,32,000/- along with interest due thereon @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 12) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge padma