IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fC.G.) M.A.faNO. 4^£ OF 2008 APPELLANT .^ •\ RESPONDENTS 7" Q-1. ^ -^ ^ ^^ ?0^- ^" ..^ ^•\7 / ^"^•-" .9 ••^ ^^ 2. ^ ^Tijau Ram Singraul Son of Shri Ramnarayan, aged about 30 years, Resident of Jorapara Moch, Takhatpur, Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.). (OwTier of the vehicle) VERSUS " Nitin Tiwari Son of Shri Umesh Tiwari, aged about 20 years, Resident ofYadunandan Nagar, Tifra, Tahsil and District Bilaspur (C.G.). Through: Umesh Tiwari (Father of Applicant) S/o Late Raghunandan aged about 50 years, Resident of Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra, Tahsil and District Bilaspur (C.G.). (Claimant) Jitendra Kumar Kashyap Sonof Ramwali, aged about 32 years, Resident of Jorapara Sarkanda, Bilaspur, Tahsil and District Bilaspur (C.G.). (Driver of the vehicle) The Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, Mendhekar Complex, Rajendra Nagar Chowk, Bilaspur, Tahsil and Djstrict Bitaspur (C.G.). (Insurer) .J5; -2-' MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OFTHE MOTOR VEHICLEACT. 1QR8 ^^•: ^ i ^^ 1 .v s£^h HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR APPELLANT RESPONDENTS M.A.(C.) No. 468/2008 Tijau Ram Singraul Versus Nitin Tiwari and others DB:- HON»BLESHRI I.M. QUDDUSI & HON»BLESHRI N.K. AGARWAL, JJ PRESENT:- Shri M.K. Bhaduri, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Gautam Khetrapal, Adv. for the respondent No. 1. Shri Dashrath Gupta, Adv. for the respondent No. 3. ORAL ORDER (27-8-2010) Per I.M. Quddusi, J 1. This is owner's appeal against the award dated 4-2-2008 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur in Claim Case No. 55/2006 whereby and whereunder an amount of Rs. 8,58,800/- has .been awarded in favour of the claimant and against the appellant/owner of the offending vehicle exonerating the Insurance Company from its liability to pay compensation on the ground that the claimant was pillion rider on the Yamaha Motorcycle bearing registration No. CG-10/E- 0661. 2. The only submission made by learned counsel for the appellant is that the policy issued in the case is motorcycle package policy which covers the risk of pillion rider. This position further clarified by the circular dated 16-11-2009 issued by Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority and, therefore, learned Tribunal has erred in exonerating the Insurance Company from its liability to pay compensation. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would further - submit that he would not press his appeal on any other grounds. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 3/ Insurance Company admits the above factual position and submits that in view of above package policy issued in the instant case, the Insurance Company is liable to cover the risk of pillion rider. 5. In view of above, the appeal is allowed in part. Respondent No. 3/Insurance Company is also held responsible for payment of compensation to the appellants/claimants along with appellant jointly and severally. The respondent No. 3/Insurance Company is granted three months' time for payment of compensation to the appellants/claimants in terms of award passed by the learned Tribunal. 6. No order as to costs. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge +