"^"t/-l^--^"\^(,.'- ^ [-• IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR Misc. Aooea^No. ^A ^ QF 2008 c K^( ^ ^)rA ^. APPELLANT ^The Oriental Insurance ^.Company Limited, through (Insurer) fndica Car CG-07- B-4656 CJ^ ^.•^'^yir ^\ ^' ./"'...,^.:;;;;^3' s.^'.*'"'""" Versus RESPONDENTS: Claiimant the Divisional Manager, Division Office, CBO- 2,Mahaveeer Gaushala Complex, Maudha Para, Raipur, District Raipur (C-.G.) 1. Laxminarayan S / o Kashiram R/o Road no. 29 Zone - 02 khurshipar, Sector 11, Bhilai Th. +District Durg P.S. Chawani C.G. .iie .le APPEAL U/S 1^3 2.. AnTsh Ah^Tmad Khan ^7"o~ Rafiq Ahmad Khan Q.No. 194 Farid Nagar, Supela Bhilai, Th.+ District- Durg C.G. OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AGAINST THE AWARD/ORDER DATED 31.07.2008 PASSED IN CLAIM CASE N0.~80/2008 BY THE 11th ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, (FTCL DURG (C.G.t PRESIDED OVER BY SHRI RAVISHANKAR SHARMA. ^ t IN THE HIGH COU Misc. Appea' APPELLANT (Insurer) fndica Car CG-07- B-4656 ^•";:s5'"& ""^^•^ •^' .'^.^^i^ ^•^^ Versu RESPONDENTS: , n^^"A/i1' ^ • K-" 1. Smt. idha Bai Sahu W/o Laxminarayan ClsCimant ^ ^ .^'VAf^ fp^ ^^J ^'l^A^- Ravf ^ S/o Laxminarayan \^^^'6r'\ ?ot1' ^ondent are_K/o Road no 29, ^le us^ ^*\J z ^ _ ^ Khurshipar Bapu Nagar Bhilai, ' ^ P.S. Chawani Th.+ District - Durg C.G ^ e^' " ty ^"" ^ ^ f^ %-' Owner of the V.ehicle ^ APPEAL U/S l^ AGAINST THE AWA PASSED IN CLAIM C ADDITIONAL MOTOR (FTCL DURG (C.G. RAVISHANKAR SHARI BRIE The appellant above r under: 1. That, an applicat Vehicles Act w seeking compens for injury sustai] H£GHCOB-RT OF CHHATFI8GAESK AT BILASPXXR BSZSC. APPBAL IC1 N0. 1633 OF 2008 APPELLANT/ IINSURERt ladica Cai' CG-07- B-4656 RESPOISDBNTS The Oiiexilal Iiisiii^iiice Coisipaiiy limited. Versiis Laxiiiio.arayaii aacl another. APPEAL U/S 173 OF THB MOTOR VEHiCLS ACT. j@B:_H@aa'ble Stoi I.M. Oiiddusi 8& Hoa'ble Shri G. Minhaiuddisa, JJ.] Preseat : Shri Ghao.shyam Patel, couiisel for fhe appellant, Shri C.K, Saliu, counsel for respondent No,2 ORAL ORBBR (Passed oa 28th day of Septembea-, 20111 Per I.M'. Quddusi. J. .This appeal has been filed by fhe appelMat/Insuraiice CoiiipctO.y agaiiist flie impugaed award dated 31-07-2008 passed by the Eleveiitli Additioiial Motor Accicleiit Clamis Tribuiial, (F.T.C,), Durg (for short 'tlie Claims TribtUial^ m. clami case No.80/2008 iii so fai' as it relates to fasteniiig fhe llabBity to pay coiLipeiisatioii upoa tlie appellaiit/lasuraiice Couapaiiy, 2. Brief facts of fhe case aie fiiat on 12-07-2006 at about 6-00 a.ai. tlie applicant/elaimaiit Laxiiiinaiayan was coixuiig to Bhilai 'by driviiig flie vehicle (Track^beai-iag registi'-atioii No. C.G. 07-C/4656, owiied by non-applicaat No. 1 - Anis Ahmed Khaa, aad iiisured by tiie IrASuraiice CoBipaiiy/appeIlaiit hereio.. On flie way, iiear Shavai~fhll Mouda, P.S. Nagpur^, a dumper without usiiig flie iiidlcator took fbe turn, on accotuit of whlch fhe veliicie of tlie applicaiit/claimaiit clashed withi tlie dum.per, IIA tliis accident, tlie applicaiit - Laxrn i nai'ayao. siistaio.ed grievous iiijuries. The iiijured Laxrfs inarayan has been takeu to Nagpiu" for tr'eatmeat frojGa wliere he has beeii brought to Disti-ict Hospital, Durg. Oii accoiuit of tlie accident, he becaoie disabled. 3, The claimaat has preferred aa application before the Claims Tribunal under Section 163-A of tlie Motor Vehicles Act (ft>r short ^^aa=^Y Itl^ """"^1 ^ "^^-^ 'l^ ^ ^^/./ r ^ww^siwriii^' 'tlie Act"), claimirig coiapensation to the tune of Rs. 9,10,000/- for tiie iiijuries sustaiiied by liim, ia the said accident. 4, Learned Trlbunal on a ciose sci-utiay of flie evidence, iiiaterial placed on record and subniissions iiiade by tlie parties, has awarded a sum of Rs.4y58,997/- as compensatiou agaiast fhe iioii- applicaiits, iTAcludiiig the appellant/ luauiaiice CoBipaay, along wifli iDiterest @ 8% per aiiiiuiix troiii fhe date of tiie application till its payxnent. 5, We have perused the recoixls offlie Claims Tribunal aiid fouad that in the claim. petition, the iiicoBie of flie iiijured/clalmaat has been showii as Rs,5,000/- per iiionfh. Ttie Claioois Tribun.al has assessed the io.come of fhe to.jured/claimao.t as Rs.4,000/- per month, meaniiig thereby that the aruiual income ofthe clamiaat was Rs.48,000/- per aanum. The claim petltion uiider Section 163-A of the Act was malritainable orily where fhe maxuiium aiinual mcome is up to Rs.40,000/-. 6 . Hon^ble Apex Court iii Dcepal Gissishbhai Swni ai&d dthers ^s. United Jiidia Insurafice Ca* Lt&.9 Bare&c^ reported m (2004) S SCC 385^ has held m para 67 as uader: "G7. We, tlierefore, ai'e offlie opliiioii fliat iCodaIaliaa corr^ctly been decided. However, we do not agrce witli tlie liiidiiigs ia Kodata fliat if a person iiivokes provisioiis of Section 163-A, fhe aiiuual iacome of Rs. 40,000 per aiuiuin shall be treated as a cap. In our opinioii, the proceediiig under Section 163-A bemg a soclal security provlsiuii, provlding for a clistiiict scheiae, only those whose aaiiual iiicoiiie is up to Rs. 40,000 caa take tlie benefit tliereof. All ofher claims ai'e required to be determjried ia terins of Cliapter XII oftheAct." 7. Iu view of the above, we ai'e of flie opimon that tlie clami petition under Sectlon 163-A of tl-ie Act was not mamtauiable at all. The Clalins TiTounal has committed a manlfest error of law m making tiie awai'd m favom' of the applicaiit/clauiiaiit. Therefore, we allow tiiis appeal, set aside the iaipugned awai'd dated 31-07-2008 aiid held fliat the claun petition itself was not mauitaiiiable under Section 163-A ofthe Act. 8, As the claiiTji petitlon was not maiatauiable uiider Section 163-A of the Act aiid the claimaiit should not remalii remediless, tlierefore, Uberty is gi-aiited to the ATespondent No. 1/clahnaiit to approach tlie appropriate foiTim, avaUable under tiie provisions of law. 9. If aiiy aiiioui-it has been deposited by the appellaiit/ Insuraiice Compaiiy tliat shall be refuiided to it foi'tiiwitli. 10. No order as to costs. 11, Certilled copy of tlie order be issued only alter fhe necessaiy ainendmerAt 1s made by fhe appellant. Sd/- LM.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G.Minbaiuddin Judge Kvr