IN THE HIGH CQURT OF JUDICATURE AT BlfASPUR CHHATnSGARH MISELLANEOUS APPEAL (C) N0. - ^^, ^ OF 2010 (MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNUER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988) Siagta^Bi^r 'PELLANT CLAIMANT ^.•:^w^^M y.L/:.(Q. Aasharam Gond, S/o Shri Ramdeo Gond, aged abourt 19 years, R/o - Village Churkidadar, Post - Kosmi, Police Station Chhura, Tahsil - Gariyabandh, District Ig Raipur(C.G-) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ?ON-CLAEVIANTS 1. ^ •7 Smt. Hembai, W/o Lakhiram, R/o - Village - Churkidadar, Near Sehool, Post - Kosmi, Police Statioa - Chhura, Tahsil - Gariyabandh, District - Raipur (C.G.) [Registered owner ofvehicle Hero Honda] The ICICI-LOMBARD General Insurance Company Limited, through Branch Manager, Branch Office, Regional Office - Unit No. 304,306, 3rd Floor, Lalganga Shopping Mall, G.E. Road, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) [Insurer ofvehicle Hero Honda] MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MQTQRVEHLCLES ACT^1988 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Misc. Appeal^To. 504/2010 ^) APPELLANT Aasharam Gond Versus RESPONDENTS Srat. Hembai and another SB:- HON'BLB SHRI N.K. AGARWAL. J PRESENT:- Shri Tarun Dadsena, Advocate, for appellant. Shri Saurabh Sharma, Advocate for the respondent No. 2. ORAL ORDER (1-2-2011) 1. Heard on application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 2. On due consideration, I am satisfied that the appellant has succeeded in explaining the cause of delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, the application is allowed and the delay is condoned. 3. With consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally. 4. This is claimant's appeal against the award dated 21-11- 2006 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gariyaband in Claim Case No. 4/2006 awarding Rs. 15,392/- as compensation in favour of the appellant/ claimant and as against the respondent No. 1 exonerating the Insurance Company from its liability to pay cdmpensation on the ground that pillion rider is not covered under the policy. 5. Facts of the case in brief are that on 1-11-2005, the deceased Lakhiram was driving Hero Honda motor cycle and the applicant was sitting in the motorcycle as pillion rider. Near Bamhani Tarra Nala, the said motorcycle colUded with a tree, as a resiilt of which Lakhiram died of injuries sustained in the accident and the applicant Fey fc £^^ ^s.B.'y %»sy sustained injuries. He filed an application under Section 163(a) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming Rs. 5,00,OOO/- as compensation for the injuries sustained in the accident. The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the evidence led, material placed and submissions made, passed the award as mentioned above. 6. Shri Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent/ Insurance Company has not disputed the fact that since the policy is package policy, the pillion rider is covered under the policy. In view of above, the respondent No. 2/ Insurance Company is also liable to pay amount of compensation awarded along with the respondent No. 1 jointly and severely. 7. As the appellant has not challenged quantum of compensation, therefore, the appeal is allowed in part. The award is modified to the extent that along with respondent No. 1, respondent No. 2/Insurance Company shall also be liable for payment of compensationjointly and severely. 8. Rest of the conditions of the award shall remain intact. 9. No order as to costs. (3$ Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge