.3- IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.l Miscellaneous Appeal {CiNo. IQ'^] /2007 APPELLANT 'c^ajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, Shiv Mohan Bhavan, Vidhan Sabha Road, Pandri, Raipur (C.G.) RESPONDENTS -y ^..' <J\.X--:'\^? :% ^'••;".\^'^ ..,..:fS^^ O, . '-'" A ^ " _ j^yf ] •c& " i^^ ...^ VERSUS Smt. Viinala Bai w/o Late Sanjay Kumar Baghel aged about 20 years, R/o Keotara, P.0. Chicholi, P.S. Kharora District Raipur (C.G.) {Claimant} Mohd. Parvez s/o Firoz Ali R/o 1-6, Farishta Complex, G.E. Road Raipur (C.G.) (Owner) Gariba Das S/o Sadhu Baghel R/o Vill. Keotara, P.0. Chicholi, P.S. Kharora District Raipur (C.G.) Pushpa Bai w/o Gariba Das R/o Vill. Keotara, P.0. Chicholi, P.S. Kharora District Raipur (C.G.) {Non-applicant No. 3&4} MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988 AS AMENDED BY ACT OF 1994 / s HIGH COURTQF_CHHATQSGA_RH^ BILASPUR M.A. (ONo.^071 of 2007 Appellant Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited Versus Respondents Smt. Vimala Bai & others APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 DB: Hon'ble Shri I. M. Quddusi S6 Honlile Shri G. Minhajuddin, JJ Shri S. S. Rajput, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Pawan Kesherwani.Advocate for the respondent No.2. None for the respondents No. 1,3 and 4. ORDBR (Oral) ( Passed on this 24th day ofJune, 2011 ) Per I. M. Quddusi, J. This appeal, filed by the Insurance Company, arises from the impugned award dated 26th July, 2007, passed by the Additional Motor Accident. Claims Tribunal (FTC), Raipur, in Claim Case No. 22/2007, awarding a sum ofRs. 4,17,500/- as coinpensation. The, brief facts, in nutshell, are that on 21.10.2006 at about 2.30 a.m. in the night when Sanjay Baghel was driving the tractor-trolley, bearing registration No. C.G. 04-DA/1003 in the crasher mine at Village -: Mura, and coming out of the mines, due to much height, the engine of the tractor gone upward and Sanjay Baghel died due to receiying the pressure of the steering of the tractor on his body. The offence was registered by the Police Station Kharora for the offence under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. 7. o The widow ofthe deceased (Vimla Bai) filed a claim case under Section 163-A of the Motof Vehicles Act, 1988 for award of a total compensation ofRs. 5,10,000/-. The non-applicants No. 3 and 4 (Gariba Das and Pushpa Bai) are parents of the deceased. Leamed Claims Tribunal, having regard to the facts situation and the evidence on record awarded a total sum of 8. Rs. 4,17,500/- along ^v-ith interest at the rate of 7.5% w.e.f. 10.1.2007 to the claimanl;- widow and fhe parents - non- applicants No. 1 and 2, holding the non-applicants No. 1 and 2 i.e. owner and Insurance Company, jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of compensation. The appellant - Insurance Company has filed this appeal on the ground of mairitainability of the claim petition, its liability and the quantum. The permission under Secdon 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Was granted to it. We have heard learned coynsel appearing for the parties and perused the lower Court records. On perusal of the impugned award and the findings arrived at by learned Claims Tribupal, it is evident that learned Claims Tribunal has not framed the issues, whether there was breach of the condition of the Insurance policy and whether the driver ofthe vehicle was havlng a valid and effective driving licence on the date of the accident. Therefore, it is apparent that the liability part has not been considered properly by the Claims Tribunal. In view of the. foregolng, we think it proper that the matter should be reconsidered by the Tribunal and give its flndings x""^ •^•fe afresh in the light uf tbe observations inade hereinabove. Therefore, we allow this appeal in part and set aside the impugned award dated 261'1 July, 2007 and remit the matter to the Tribunal for decision afresh in the light of fhe observations made in the body of this ot'der. 9. No order as to costs. 10. Needless to mention that the parties shall be allowed to amend their pleadings, adduce further evidence again in support of their pleadings and rnay t'lle further documents and get the documents verified etc. The parties may raise the issue regarding maintainabllity i)(' the claim petition as well as other issues, if so advised. Thereflfter, the decision shall be niade by the Tribunal, as early as pussible. 11. The amount, if any, depOBtted by the insurance company, shall remain in deposit till decialon of the claim petition, afresh. 12. The parties shall appear before the Claims Tribunal on 26.7.2011. 13. The Registry is directecj (.o send back the papers, requisitioned from the Tribunal, forthwlth. Sd/- I-M.Quddusi Judge Thakur Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge