IN THE HON'BLE HIGH^&Ol&T OF CHHATNSGARH AT BILA^PUR f^ APPEArNO.VHb 7S011 MISCELLANEOUS APPI 2011 APPELLANT ^Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Com. Ltd. Vidhan Sabha Road, Raipur District Raipur, Chl^attisgarh (INSURER OF TRUCK N0. CG 04 J/4745) VERSUS IPPONDENTS ^ /• A' ,^ ^/ ^ My (/ ^ . ^ /< ^ /^}/ '/w /• ;/' Smt. Devaki Bai, wife of Late Shri Lalit Singh Rajput, aged about 26 years Khorginjara Singh, son of Late Shri Birij Singh Rajput, aged about 55 years Both residents are Village Tribhubhanpur, Post Badra, Thana Pathariya, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh (CLAIMANTS)WI Dadulal, son of Shambhulal, aged about 25 years, resident presently at Ranjeet Singh, son of Sardar Guljar Singh, Qr.No. A- 17/13 Udaya Society Tatibandh, Thana Aamanprka, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (DRIVER OF TRUCK N0. CG 04 J/4745) 4., Smt. Preetpal Kaur, wife of Guljar Singh, ^' resident of Qr.No. A-17/13 Udaya Society Tatibandh, Thana Aamanaka, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (OWNBR OF TRUCK N0. CG 04 J/4745) MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988 AS AMENDED BY ACT OF 1994 /T^^^< ^n iii^t } HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH: HON'BLE MR. I.M.QUDDUSI & HON'BLE MR.GULAM MINHAJUDDIN. JJ M.A.rCINo.145/2011 Appellant Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Respondents Smt. Devaki Bai & others Present: Mr. S.S. Rajput, Advocate for the appeilant. Mr. B. Kaiwartya, Advocate for respondent No.2. None for other respondents though served. ORDER(Orall (9th August, 2011) I.M. Quddusi. J; 1. Heard. 2. The appellant-lnsurance Company has filed this miscelianeous appeal against the award dated 03.08.2010 passed by the learned 10th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short 'the Ctaims Tribunal') in Claim Case No.27/09. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 27.7.2008 at about 4,00 p.m. deceased Lalit Kumar was going towards Raipur from Baloda Bazar in the car bearing registration number CG04-T-0817. When he reached near Chaiti Talab, Saragaon, a truck bearing registration number CG04J-4745 coming from the opposite direction dashed the car as a result the deceased sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. The claimants, who are widow and father of the deceased, have filed claim application seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.5,38,800/- on the ground that they were dependent on the deceased, who was the sole earning member in family, and due to his death, they have suffered loss of income. 4. The Ctaims Tribunal vide impugned award allowed the claim application of the claimants, awarded a sum of Rs.3,48,000/- and fastened liability on the appellant herein to satisfy the award. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. We have also perused the records of the Claims Tribunal. 6. Perusal of the records reveals that one R.K. Bhargawa was examined twice in the matter, firstly as AW-1 for and on behalf of the non-applicant No.3 on 22.3.2010 and thereafter on 8.4.2010 for and on behalf of non-applicant No.1 & ' 2 and statements made by him on both the occasions are contradictory to each other. However, the Claims Tribunal while deciding the claim petition has •/^'^^% y^f^i^ t 11^^,,.. ' • ofe^ < ... ignored this fact and passed the Jmpugned award. Whereas, it was the bounden duty of the Claims Tribunal to enquire into the matter to find out the truth, as envisaged under Section 168 & 169 of the Act, 1998 and Rule 226 of the Motor Vehicle Rules. Therefore, we feel that the matter requires reconsideration at the end of the Claims Tribunal. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part, impugned award is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Claims Tribunal for taking decision afresh after calling the said witness namely Shri R.K. Bhargawa. Assistant Grade-111, R.T.O Office, Raipur and giving opportunity to the partles toask questions from him. The Claim Tribunal may also ask questions from the said witness regarding validity of the driving iicence. The amount, so deposited by the insurance company, if not disbursed by the claimants, shall not be either disbursed to the claimants or refunded to the insurance company till the decision is taken afresh by the Claims Tribunal. However, if the amount has already been withdrawn by the claimants, the same shall not be recovered from them. 8. The parties are directed to appear before the Claims Tribunal concerned on 21 September. 2011. The Registry is directed to transmit record of the Claims Tribunal concerned without further delay. No order as to costs. Roshan/- Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge