d. DNsion IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILAS PU R APPELLANT ^fNon-Applicant No.31 Misc. Appeal (C) No. ^2.0 /2011 ^ ^The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Through its Sr. Divisional Manager, Divisional Office- Geetanjali Bhawan, Main Road, Korba (C.G.). (ESPONDENTS :1. ^' ^^? y^<''' ^'" 2. ^' ^- Versus ; Janakram, S/o Shri Babulal Mehar, r/o Nagoeekhar, Dam, Distt. Korba |C.G.). .Driver Satish Agrawal, S/o Shri Om Prakash Agrawal, r/o First Floor, Mohsin Market, Raipur (C.G.)., through C.G. Coal Transport Plot No. 146, T.P.Nagar, Korba, Tahsil and Distt. Korba (C.G.). .Owner Smt. Rajkumari Kunwar, Wd/o late Shri Durga Prasad, aged about 24'years, Kumar Nilima Kunwar, D/o late Durga Prasad Kunwar, aged about 1 1/2 months , minor, represented through natural guardian and mother Smt. Rajkumari Kunwar, the Respondenfc No.3 above, Ramsai Kunwar @ Ramswaroop, S/o late Shri Ghursai, aged about 49 years, cs ^ Smt. Laxmin Kunwar, W/o Shri Ramsai @ Ramswaroop, aged about 46 years, Note: All the Respondents No. 3 to 6 are by caste - Kunwar, Permanent r/o village Kudurmal, Gopalpur . Darri, Distt. Korba (C.G.), Presently r/o village Mudapur, Korba, Tahsil and Distt. Korba (C.G.). .Claimants APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT.1988. 'l I. ^--^s^ % ^;\.J^:^;.^j "^i^'^^l ^t^L HISH COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH: HON'BLE MR. I.M.QUDDUSI & HON'BLE MR.6ULAM MINHAJUDDIN. JJ ^ppellQnts Respondents M.A. rd No.320/2011 The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Janakram & others Presentj AAr. A. Kumar, Advocate appears on behalf of AAr. RGtcxn Pusty, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Puneet ftuparel, Advocate for respondent Nos3 to 6. AAr. A! Hussdn, Advocate for Inspire Industries Pvt. Ltd., Bibspur. ORDER(Oral) - (12th September, 2011) I.M. Quddusi. J; 1. Heard. 2. The appeliant-Insurance Compwiy has filed tKt3 miscellaneous appeal against the award dated 19.01.2011 passed by the leamed Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Korba (for short lthe Claims Tribunal') in Clalm Case No.95/09. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the claimants, who are widow, daughter and parents of deceased Durga Prasad, have filed a claim application before the Claims Tribunal seeking compensation to the tune of fts,140,00,000/- for the death.of said Durga Prasad, who died in a motor accident which took place on 9.7.2009 when the motorcycle of the deceased. on which he was coming towards Kudurmal from Katghora, was dashed by Hywa truck bearing registration number CG04-A-Q912 due to rlash and negligent driving by its driver. The claimants have claimed compensation on the ground that they ; were dependent on the deceased, who was the sole earning member in the family, and due to his death, they have suffered toss of income. 4. The Claims Tribunal vide impugned award partially allowed the claim 'application, awarded a sum of Rs.15,18,000/- as compensation to the claimant and fastened tiability upon the appellant-Insurance Company to ' satisfy the impugned award. <s^ 5. We haye heard learned counsel for the parties< We have also perused the records of the Claims Tribunal. 6, After perusing the documents regarding income of the deceased i.e, Ex-P-13 <& Ex.P-14, wherein it has been mentioned that the deceased, who was unskilled worker, was earning Rs.11,000/- per month, this Court vide order dated 29-06.2011 issued-notices to the employer of the deceased i.e, Inspire Industries Pvt. Ltd,, Bilaspur and pursuant to which, Shri Vikas Jain, Director of the said company, appeared through his counsel, submitted his version supported with an affidavit and in which, inter alia, he has stated in Para-12 as uhder:- "12.That, the compony submits that from the perusal of Company's- documents Annexure - A17, A18 <& A19 clearly demonstrate that the applicant in F.T. No.95 of 2009 produced a document Exhibit P13 Income Certificate is not on the Letter Head of our Company as well as the seal in also not <of oufi:.company. The Company has enquired from each & every member of Officers <& Staff about the signature in Exhibit P-13. Every person denied that they have signed on this type of paper. The comparison from the signature of Officer <& Staff shows that nobody had signed in Exhibit P-13, Regarding P-14 the company has enquired from its Office Staff & compared also which shows that nobody had signed Exhibit P-14*" It has also been mentioned in the said submissions that the deceased was engaged on daily wage basis and was getting Rs.118.03 paise per day. He has also filed copies of statement of contribdtion towards Employees Provident Fund Scheme & Employees Family Pension Scheme fumished by the company to the authority concerned and perusal of which shows that sometimes the deceased works for 19 days, sometimes works for 26 days and sometimes for 25 days in a calendar month, 7. Whereas, AW-1 Smt. Rajkumari Kunwar, widow of the deceased, has stated in Para-7 of her cross-examinatfon that her father-in-law brought the certificate (Ex.P-13) but from wher®he brought that certificate, she does not know, Ex.P-13 is the certificate dated 6.8,2009 purported to be / written in the letter head of M/s Inspire Industries Pyt. Ltd., Bilaspur. She has further stated in Para-8 that it is incorrect to say that certificate (Ex,P-13) is fake and Ex.P-14 was prepared on a blank paper by Vijoty Kumar in my house. Vijay Kumar happened to be son of my sister-in-faw. 8. In view of above, we are of the opinion that the claimants have knowingly used a fake document to show monthly incpme of the deceased as Rs.11,000/- and the Claims Tribunal without conducting any enquiry regarding income certificate has assessed income of the deceased as it is hard to digest that an unskilled tabour will get Ks,ll,000/- per month from the/employer. 9. Whereas, Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act, - .J? 1988') provides that on receipt of application for compensation, the Ctaims Tribunal shall hold an inquiry into the claim, Section 169 of the Act, 1988 prescribes procedure and power$ of the Claims Tribunal and says that in holding any inquiry under Section 168, the Clcfims Tribunal may, subject to any rules that may be made in this behalf, follow such summary procedure as it thinks fit. The Claims Tribunal shall have all the powers of a Civi! Court for the purpose of taking evidence on oath and of enforcing attendance of the witnesses ond of compelling the discovery and production of documents and material objects and for such other purposes as may be prescribed and the Ctoims Tribunal shall be deemed to be a Civil Court for all the purposes of Section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Cr.P.C. Besides this, in Rule 226 of the Motor Vehicle Rules, 1994 also it has been provided that the Claims Tribunal shall conduct enquiry to ascertain the fact, lO.The Hon'ble Supreme Cour-t also in Para-11 of Rajkumar Vs. A^ay Kumor & another reported in 2010 (12) SCAUE 265 has held that "... Tribunal should notbe a silent spectator when medical evidence is tendered in regard to ifie mjunes and their effect, in particular 1iie extent of permanent di^bility. Sections 168 and 169 of the Act make it evident that the Tribunal does not function as a neutral umpire QS m)a civil suit, butas an active exphrer and ^eker of trui^ who is required to ^old an en^uiry inta the clam/ for determining the 'just compensathn'. TheTHbunal shoufd therefore take an ..^^^: w. active rale to ascertain the true and cwrect position so iiiat It can assess iiie 'just compensatiori'. 11. Therefore, we feel that the matter requires reconsideration at the end of the Claims Tribunal as the Cbims Tribunal has not conducted any enquiry to ascertain the fact regarding income of the deceased. 12,In the result, the appeal is partly allowed, the impugned award is set aside and the matter is remitt-ed back to the Claims Tribunal for decision afresh in light of the observations made in this order, Needless to mention that the Claims Tribunal shall provide opportunity to the parties to adduce further evidence, if any, or to call/recall the witnesses, amend the pleadings or to file documents or verify the dbcuments already filed cxnd then decide the claim petition after conducting necessary enquiry as provided under Sections 168 <& 169 of the Act, 1988 and ftules 226 of the Motor Vehicles Rules, After recording evidence and conducting enquiry, if the Claims Tribunal finds that present is ttee fit case for lodging of complaint under Section 340 of CrP.C., it should lodge a complaint keeping in mind that wrong doers should not go unpunished, 13,The Registry is directed to transmit record of the Claims Tribunal concerned without further delay. No order as to costs. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge