nii.-! ^ ^ BEFORE THE HON'BCE HIGHCOURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR M.A. No. ^,'^T^\ I 2004 1i?<!l .Sii APPELLANTS / Pancho Bai W/o Bhandari Chauhan, Aged about 35 years, Occupation- House Wife, R/o. Village- Aangana, Tahsil- Dharamjaigarh, Dista-ict- Raigarh (C.G.) ^a. Minor Malikram, S/o Late Bhandari Aged About 14 years. b^- Minor Salikram, S/o Late Bhandari Aged About 08 years. c/ Minor Padraa D/o Late Bhandari Aged About 12 years, ^^ ^^••. ,>w^^\ A'','y'i o'.-''- .^<^? ^'^y' - AU Through : His Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Pancho Bai , W/o Late Bhandari Chauhan, All of R/o- Village- Anagana, P.S. &TahsU- Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) ?• <;.- ^e.- ,^' VERSUS sy__,_.__ RESPONDENTS L-l-^ Vedram Patel (Death) S/o Padman Patel i^_ a^ Maniram Patel, S/o Late Vedram Patel, Aged'about 40 years. Q_,b. Alakhram Patel, S/o Late Vedram Patel, Aged about 38 years. Chudamani ^// S/oLate Vedram Patel, Aged about 37 years. ^^ Dad-uram, S/o Late Vedram Patel, Aged about 35 years. Santosh, S/o Late Vedram Patel, Agedabout 34 years. - AllR/o. ofVillage-Shahapur, Tahsil- Dharamjaigarh, Distric't- Raigarh (C.G.) (^-2^ Lalkumar Patel, S/o S.T. Patel, Occupadon- Tractor Driver, R/o. Durgapur, Dharamjaigarh, Tahsil- Dharamjaigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 3/ The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., ^- Branch - Patthalgaon, District - Jashpurnagar, Braneh Office - The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,Itwari Bazar, Raigarh (C.G.) MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTORVEHICLE ACT 1988 :'i1.;l i,: i:i !iB .l.i.:i.^if-U.. ;'Ba HI6H COURTOF CHHATTISGARH. BILJUSPUR DB: HON'BLE I.M. QUDDU8I fc HOH'BLB N.K. AGRAWAL, JJ M. A. No.674 pf 2004 1APPELLANTS Paacho Bai and ofhers Vs. APPEARANCE: Mr. Amit SIiarma, coiuisel fer the Appellauts. Mr. Vishau Koshta , couusel for Respondents l(a)(b)(c)(d)(e) &2. Mr.^inash Mahra, counsd for respondent no,3 ORDEiR (ORAL1 (26.08.2010) Per I.M. QUDDU8I 1. This appeal tsaa becn filcd ^^inst fhe impugned award dated 06.05.2004 passed by the Motor Accident Clanns Tribunal, Ra^arh in Claun Case No.l 1/2002 whereby the Tribunal rejected the appMcation filed by the claiinants stotmg inter-alia fhat the dcceased tuniself was negl^ent who was sitting on fhe Mudguard of fhe Tractor and if he could have sit iu thc Trolty, Iie would have entifled to get the coinpensation. 2. Brief facts of the case are fhat on 27.02.2001 deceascd Bhandari Ram was teaveUng in Tractor Trolty bcaring Regn. No. M.P. 26/^E-4446 which was driven by non-applicant no.2 Lal Kumar. It is atleged fhat due to rash and negl^ent driving of thc Lal Kiiniar, the deceased fell down fi?oia the Tractor and camc under fhe tires of fhe Tractor, as a result ofwhich, he dled. The claimants being wife and chUdren of deceased fited AppUcation before the Tribuaal under Rufc jiuual* lA-ii RB8PONDBWT8 Vedram Patel (died) and ofhers ! 220(1) of the Motor Vchicles Act, 1994 and clauned Rs.4,25,000/- as ainount ofcoinpensation. 3. A perusal of the iinpugned award dated 6.05.2004 sbows that no proper findiag has been given nor there is any assessment in the impugned award and the fiiiding regarding negligence is not based on aay laaterial evideiice. Merely sittin^ oa the Mudguard, a person cannot be said to be negUgent. It has also not been laentioned in fhc award as to whefher the claixnants are entitled to get coinpensation uudcr no fault liabflily. 4. Chapter X of the Mo^tor Veliicles Act, 1988 provides for liabffity wifhout fault. Section 140 of thc Act, 1988 further provides for liabiMly to pay compcnsation in certaia cascs on the principle of no fault Section 140(4) of thc Act reads as under: "A clann for coinpensation i.uider sub- section (1) shaU not be defeatcd by reason ofaay wrongful act, neglect or default of fhc person in respect of whosc dcafh or peraianent disablcinent fhe claim has been inadc nor shaffl the quautiun of cojapensation recovcrable in respcct of such death or permanent disableiaent be reduced on the basis of the share of such person iu fhe responsibUily for such death or permanent dlsableinent" 5. At fhis stege, learaed coiinsel for (he appeUants has submitted that thc appellaats want to prove fhat the deceased was not negl^ent 6. Considering the .facts aad circiimstances of the case as discussed above, we are of the opinion fhat fhc matter requires reconsideration at fhe end of MACT. Therefore, wc ^Ut-li.dca*-*-'--"' taULfc set aside the iinpugned award dated 06.05.2004 and remit the matter back to fhe MACT concemed for fresh dccision. The Claini AppUcation shall be restored aad it shaU be decided in fhe l^ht of the observations Kiade above. The Tribuaal shall afford opportunity to both the parties to adduce evidence and at^ue their case. 7. The Tribunal shaU decide thc inatter as eariy as possible prefeiably wifhia a period of six nionths fi?oia fhc date of appearance ofthe parties. 8. The records of the Clainus Tribunal sbsSl be seat back forthwifh. 9. The parties shaU appear before the Tribunal along-wifh copy of fhis order on aO"' of SeBtember. 2010. 10. Accordingly, fhe appeal is aUowed. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- N.K.Agrawal Judge