IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ^ ^ ^ M.A. fa. No.^4^/20 ApDellants ^^ ":^^ ^^ ^^y- & Respondent A )00 Manager, Young Yamaha Company, Narmada Chowk, Mungeti Road, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS 1. >L 2.t- 3.1. 4t 5.^ 6. Ramswarup Jaiswal age 48 years, son ofTulsiram Jaiswal Smt. Phulbai Jaiswal age 42 years, wife of Ramswarup Jaiswal Sadhna Jaiswal age 17 years, (minor) Avnish Jaiswal ae 10 years (minor) No. 3 to 4 son of Shri Ramswarup Jaiswal, through natural guardian fa- ther Shri Ramswarup Jaiswal All ofthem resident ofVillage Saristal, Po. Akhrar,Tahsil Lormi, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) Kapurchand Dhritlahre son of Krinshnachand Dhritlahre, Po. Tikari, Distt. Bilaspur(C.G.) Sanjay Yadav son of SantramYadav, House no. 37, Magarpara Ward, Bilaspur(C.G.) ADpeal Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act 1988 ^. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR APPELLANTS RESPONDENTS MArONo. 474 of 2009 : Manager, Young Yamaha Company Versus : Ramswarup Jaiswal & Ottiers APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT DB: Hon'bte Shri Justice I.M. Quddusi & Hon'Me Shri Justice N. K. Agarwal. Present : Shri KL Pandey, Adwcate for the appetlant. Shri PP Sahu, Advocate for respondent No. 1 to 4. ORALOIWER (Passedon 09.11.2010) Per: I.M. Quddusi, J. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellantagalnst the order dated 20.01.2009, passed by the llnd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC), MungeU, Distt. Bilaspur (for short 'the Tribunal') in daim case No. 29/07, awarding compensation Rs. 3,04,500/- in fevour of the claimants and as against the appellant. Brief facts of the case according to the appellant are that, on 20.06.2006, Santosh Jatswal (since deceased) while coming towards village Saristal from Bilaspur atong with his uncte Anujram on the motorcycle (Suzuki) bearing registration No. CG-10-ZJ-5821, met with an accident wfth Trudc, asa result of which Santosh succumbed to the frijuries sustained in the sakl accident. T? "%. iffc-^&.l I 1 3. The claimants preferred an applteatjon before the Tribunal against the owner of the motorcycle under Seotton 1^-A of the Motor Vehfoles Act, clalming compensation to the tune of Rs. 8,37,200/" for the death of cteceased in the said accident. 4. The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of evjdenee led,.materiat placed and submisstons made by the parties, awarded a sum of Rs. 3,04,500/- In favour of the claimants holding the appellant Uable for payment of compensation to the claimants. 5. We have heard the counsel appearing for the parties and perused the Lower Court Record. 6. The Tribunal has imposed the Hability upon the appellant/Young Yamaha Company on the ground thgA the motorcyele was jn possesston of the appellant in exchange ^ a new motorcycte given by the dealer to the registereel owner of Suzuki Motorcycle whteh met with an accident. However, even if it is presumed that the motorcycle In question was b^ng driven by the deceased, who was an employee of appetlant/Young Yamaha Company, it.was neoessary to prove that the accident had taken place during the course of employment. Merefy using the motorcycle wtth permission of the owner would not make the owner Habte to pay compensation to the claimants. Further, the deceased was driving the said vehicle, thus he steps into the shoes of the owner and as such he was not a third party. AM these facts have not been consldered by the Tribunal white pa^ing the award. ?^^i^i'^et^^ ^ ^gfi?^^-'-% •^s^y. 7. In view of above and in the absence of any findings in this regard, we feel tt necessary to remit the matter to the Tribunal concerned for decision afresh. 8. Accordingly. the appeal is allowed in part. The order dated 20.01.2009 is set asicte and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal concerned, for deciston afresh. 9. The claim petition of the claimants shalt be restored to Sts original number and same shall be decided afresh after providing an opportunlty to both the parties to adduce further evidences, to amend the pleadings and to fite addltional documents, If any. 10. Needless to mention that the Tribunal shall deeide the cteim petltion as earty as posslbte preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of LCf?. The LCR shall be retumed forthwith. For the above, the partles shail appear before the Tribunal concemed on 7.12.2010. No order asto costs. Sahu Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- N.K.Agrawal Judge