IN THE HIGH CQURT OF CHHATTISGAR AT BILASPUR IC^r.) 964 M.A.IclNo.f c' APPELLANT UmeshKumarPrajapati Respondent No.2 S/o Rafflbali Praj^pati, Aged about 25 years, R/o near Oriental PaperMil, Nayapara, Village Theka, P.S. Torba, TehsilSs District Bilaspur (C.G.) {Owner ofAufobearingNo. C.G.10-C/4769} •-*-..•.. ^ ' • • . . • • •. VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. Smt. Gita PalW/oLateLalit Pal, Aged about 39 years. S.v^^ ^/'j^ 2. Kamal Pal S/o Late Lali ^T/^?1' . ^ . , , . .„ /^*^/' ^* s^ aged about 17 years. ^y^^ Lalit Pal, ^l//»7AW_' _ 3. Kumcu?Kiran Pal D/o Late LaUt Pal, aged about llyears. Respondent No. 2 & 3 are Mih&r, represented through there Mother Smt. Gita Pal W/o Late Lalit Pal. 4-. Smt. Laxmi Pal W/o Late Ganesh Pal Aged about 66 years. Respondent No. 1 to 4 are clainiants/applicants and all residence ofMahELmand, Lalkhadan, P.S. Torba, and Tahsil 8s District Bilaspyr. Takakhtpur, Bilaspur (C.G.). 5. IfkyTokiyo General Insurance Conipany Ltd., through Branch Manager, Ifko Tokiyo General Insurance Company Ltd., Branch Office, 3Td floor ShopNo. 345,347 Lalganga Shopping Moll G.E. Road, Raipur, C.G. 6, Ramesh Kumar S/o Rarabali Prajapati, Aged ab&ut 22 years, R/o, Deorikhurd, P.S. Torba, , Tehsil & Distriet BilaspUr (G.G.) l'-j^^M.fJffif" ; ; At present Villag^'Theka, near PaperlVlil, P.S. --A- :-'-••"' : , - .'. ; • Torba, Tehsil& District Bilaspur.(C.G.) . {Driver ofAutoBearingNo.C.G.10-C/4769} MISC. APPEAL U/S. 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT AGAINST THBAWARD/OKDER DATBD ^9-7-2011 PASSEDBySHRIHEMANT i^i^SlW- SARAF. Si'H'SiIOT&R ACCtDENT CLAIMSTRlBUNALBILASPUR.IC.G.) IN C.T.NO. 155/aoiO—— KI8H COURT GF CKKATTIgaARH AT BIU^PUR %'£.A.(CjN0. 864 OF 2011 Uiuesh Kuiuai' pi'ajapati RESPOPNDEHT N0.2 Siu.t. Glta Pal and others. AFFBAL UNDES SECTION 173 OF THS MOTORVBHICLB^ ACT,J,988 iBi-ffisioa Beach: jioa'M®Stei i.M^Quddusi & Hon'ble Shri Q. MiBliaJKddIn, JJ.S Sliri R.K. Jain, counsel for the appeuant. None for resuondents No. 1 to 4 &6 thous;& served. SIui Aiarito Das & Ms. Taaushrcc Das, couascl for respondent No.5. OSALQR3ER Passed on 11th day of Iioveaabei-, 2011) i.J Tliis appeal has beeii filed oy tfae appellant/owner agal&st fhe Iiupugned'award dated 29-07-2011 passed iu Claiin Case No. 155/2010 by thc Fifth Additional Motor Accideut Claims Tribuiial, BIiaspur (for sttort 'the Claims Tflbuual'), challeiiglu^ the liabillty to pay coiupensatioii to tlie claunants. 2. Brief facts of flie case, as per versioii of fhc claimaiits ai'e that ou 14-09-2010, Lalit Pal was going ofl foot froia hls house to Suahzada Kiraiia Stoi'es iieai' Lalkhadan Talab for purchasinj klrana. At ~that tune, the offeudiiig vehiclc (Deliveiy Auto) beadc.g 1'eglstpation No. C.G. 10-C/47G9 which was beiug driven by respoudent No.6 hei'eui, ui a iash aud iiegligent inaii&er, caine froiu behlud aud dashed fcalit Pal, as a nesult of wUch he sustaiued. grlevous injurles. He was adialtted in th.e hospltal for treatnient where he died in the hospital dujiag the coui'se of fhe treatnient. Report of flie incident was given lu the Police Station, Tonya anu an offence was icgistered under Section 304-A of ftic .^" . .. . . . -- t.P.C. Afier cbiupletiug iuvestigatioii, cliarge sheetwas fEEed. 3. The appeBants/ cla i marits beiug legal heu~s ~ aad legal rcpreseutatives of fue ueceased had filed a cla i rn petition utider Sectiou 166 of tlie Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act"; elauiilLE.g SL total aiiLOUiit of coiQ.pensatlon of Rs.56,50^000/- on various heads 6jgaln.st the respoudents, for the deafh of Lalit Pal (ueceased). 4. Leariied Claliiis Triouual on a dose sci'utlu.y of tb.e evidence led, niaterial placecl aud subnilsslons uiade by fue parties, has auowed flie clalui petition lu part aud has awai'ded an amount of Rs.3,74,800/'- to fh.e clahriau.ts agaiust flie appeUaiit aud respoudent No.u herein, joinfly aiid severally aloug wifh. uiterest @ 7.5% per aiunim. fl'oui ttie date of clalui petition tul tlie paynient 1s Biade, 3. We have heai'd leariied couiisel for the pfcU:'tles and perused uic record of tlie Clalais Triounal as also tb.e ioipugued award.. 6. Though the Xerox copy of the drivjag licence was filed but ftie InsLU'ailce Couipany has not adduced any evidence of fhe officlal of fhe R.T.0. coiicerneu. The buiucu of pioof fuat the di'iver of tue o^endia.g vel'iicle was iiot havhig a valid aiid effectiv& driviu.g licence was on uie Iusurau.cc Coiu.pany. Kowever, fb.e representative of the lusui'ance Conipany had adduced evidence that the driver was uot haviug a valld and effective drivuig licence and fliere was no eudorseiueiit io. hls driviug licence authoriziug liuu to drive Light Goods Vehlcle. 7. We have perused tlie Xerox copy of the duvlug liceuce whlch is available on record of the Clainis Trlbunal aud found that th.e saiiie was Issued ln tb.e year 2007. The accidexit had taken placc In flie year 2010 aud thercfore, whether he was auth.orised to drive the LigJj.t Goods Vehicle or not on the da.te of a.ccideiit is to be determ.lued uy"tlie Clylois Triljuiial on. tb.e I)asis offhe evldence of&e R.T.&Taiid OQ per'usal ofthe orlgiual i'ecord or tb.e eviderLce adduced on the oasis of original recortl, wliich lias liot bccu doue. S. IB. view of Uie above, we are of tlie opiiiiOD. tha.t the io.atter reqiures re^bQsideratioju at tlie eud of fue Tribunal. Therefore, we a31ow tbis appeal io. part, set aslde fiie iiELpugued a.ward axid reinit back uie iu.atter to tbe Cla.lius Tribuiial for declsloii afi'esli in. vlew of the obseivations nxade a-bove. " ^ 9. Needless to niention fh.at the parties shall be provided opportiiriity to ameud the pleadiugs, adduce further evidence, file uociimeuts or get fhe dociunejlts verified etc., on fhe basis offlie pleadlags aucady ou record. 10. The parties shaB appeai' before fhe Claims Tribunal on 14-12-2011. 11. Record of tiie Clauus Tribunal shall be seut back forfhwith. .2. No order as to c-osts. •*. Sdi- G. Minhajuddin Judge Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge <c-