BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURTOFCHHATTISGAftH JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR ^ ^ l^ Misc.Appeal (C) No. ..^...S.*^....... 2010 APPELLANTS ORIGIONAL CLAIIWANTS V ,-y ^^ Tr^ ^ -\^^.\r •y-"^ ^c",N^ ,...:^:?^p^< .».}•> •' t U*' ^ G 0)-. Smt. Ramkubai Jain,Age-50yrs. W/o. Shri Komalchand Jain. (Mother-in-law of Deceased) Sandeep Kumar Jain, Age-28 yrs. S/o. Shri Komalchand Jain. (Brother-in-law bf Deceased) Master ;^^s£-KumarJain Age - 9 yrs. S/o. Late Sanjay Kumar Jain (Son of Deceased) ThrQugh:- Smt. RamkubaiJain Grand Mother& Guardian. /* MasterAkshat Kumar Jain Age-7yrs. S/6. Late Sanjay Kumar Jain (Son of Deceased) Through:- Smt. Ramkubai Jain Grand Mother&Guardian. R/o.lVI/s.Mahaveer Traders Vivekahand Chowk DONDI LOMARA Distt. Durg (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONCtENTS ORIGIONAL NON APPLICANTS Komal Chahd Jain S/o.Late Rajmal Jain VivekanandChowk ' DONDI LOHARA Distt. Durg (C.&) ^'-^ (Owner of Qualis Toyata Car No.CG-08-5183) .....2 ^) 02,,/Virendra KumarKanoje S/o. Daya Ram Kanoje R/o.WardNo.10 DONDI LOHARA Distt. Durg (C.G.) (Driver ofQualis Toyata Car No.CG-08-5183) 03<^The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. :- Branch Manager, Rajmal Complex, Kamptee Line RAJNANDGAON (C.G.) (InsuranceCompany ofQualis Toyata CarNo.CG-08-5183) (Private Car Package Pol. No. 190507/31/06/01/00000014 Period -18.04.2006 to 17.04.2007) DATE OF ACCIDENT 21.09.2006 ^ MEMORANDUM OFAPPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR^/EHICLE ACT 1988 THE JUDGEMENT IS PASSED BY THE TWELTH ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, DURG (C.&) ON 05.111.2010 PRESIDED BY SMT. KANTA MARTIN k ^^^®f^^^^^^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH_: BILASPUR M.A. (C) No. 486 pf 2010 Apppllants Hemraj Bdrdia & others Versus Respondents Komal Chand Jain & others M,A, (C) No. 485 of 2010 Appellants HeEaraj Bardia 65 others Versus Respondents Komal Chand Jain & others M.A. (C) No. 489 of_2Q10 Appellants Smt. Ramkubai Jain Ss, others Versus Respondents . Komal Chand Jain 8s others M.A. (C) No. 488 of 2010 Appellants Smt. Rarakubai Jain 85 others Versus Respondents Komal Chand Jain 8s others M.A. (C'l No. 487of2Q,m Appellants Smt. Ramkubai Jain 8s others Versus Respondents Komal Chand Jain 8s others DB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice I. M. Quddusi 6s Hon'bleMr. Justice N. K. Agarwal Shri Sachin Singh Rajput and Shri Anant Bajpai, Advocates for the appellants. Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, Advocate for the respondent No.l/Owner. None for the respondent No.2. Shri Dashrafh Gupta, Advocate for the respondent No.S/United India Insurance Company Ltd. O R D ER (Oral) .(Passed on this 26fh day ofAugust, 2010) Heard. 1. The .aforemendoned five appeals involve common question of facts and law as they have been Gled against the orders dated 5.1.2010, passed by the 10ttl Additional Motor Accident Claims ^ff" I. 4. '^ Tribunal in Claim Case Nos. 74/2009, 75/2009, 84/2009, 86/2009 and 85/2009, respectively, therefore, these appeals are being disposed ofby this common order. Learned claims Tribunal has dismissed the claim of the appellants, inter alia, holding that the appellants have already received compensation from the Consumer Redressal Forum, Durg, hence tRey are not entitled to get any claim from the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, under the same insurance policy i.e. 190507/31/06/01/00000014. It is not necessary to mention the facts of this case as we feel that learned claims Tribunal has not considered the third party claim that the policy in question was a package policy (comprehensive policy) which covers the liability of third party as occupant of a private car. The-circular dated 16th November, 2009, has been issued to the Chief Executive Officers of all General Insurance Companies, by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authorify, regarding "Liability of Insurance Companies in respect of Occupant of a Private Car and Pillion Rider in a Two-Wheeler under Standard Motor Package Policy (also called Comprehensive Policy)" in »: sequence of the earlier circular M.V.No. 1 of 1978 dated 18U1 March, 1978. (regarding occupants carried in Private Car) effective from 25th March, 1977 and the Circular MOT/Gen/10 dated.2nd June, 1986 (regarding Pillion Riders in a Two-Wheeler) effective from the date of the circular. These circulars were issued regarding insured's liability in respect of OGcupant(s) carrying in a private car and pillion rider cariying on two wheelers, which are covered under the Standard Motor Package '%.. •'K S lr "%. ^....^•^.y^»< '% ^^A- 7. '^ Policy. The Insurance Regulatory and Developinent Authority regarding liability of insurance corapanies in respect of occupant of a .private car and pillion rider in a two wheeler under standard motor package policy (comprehensive policy) directed that pending further orders, the insurers shall not vary the coverage, terms and conditions, wordings, warranties, claUses and endorsements in respect of covers that were under the erstwhile tariffs and observed that all general insurers should adhere to tbe aforeraentioned circulars and any non-corapliance of the same would be viewed seriously by the authority. Since the above circulars and the terms and conditions of the coraprehensive policy were not taken into consideration by the learned claims Tribunal concerned, we are of the opinion that the matter requires reconsideration by the claims Tribunal. Therefore, we allow these appeals in part and set aside the impugned orders dated 5.1.2010, passed by the 10ttL Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in Claim Case Nos. 74/2009, 75/2009, 84/2009, 86/2009 and 85/2009, respectively, and remit the matter to the claims Tribunal to decide the claim cases afresh, in the light of the observations made hereinabove,.taking into consideration the circulars and terms & conditions of the comprehensive policies, involved in the respective raatters. No order as to costs. SA'- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge TtigJnlr