-< IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUbICATURE AT BILASPUR MISC. APPEAL (c) N0. 1°^ /20P8 APPELLANT: (Insurer) RESPONbENTS Claimant s-^ ..V^A^ ^:?1 Driver of vehicle. Owner of vehicle Vs The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, through the Branch Manager, Branch Offjce, Korba. ^ 1. Onkar Singh, aged about 44 years, son of Prahlad Singh, resident of Quarter No.M236, Pump-House Colony, South: Eastem Coalfields Ltd. Colony, Korba (CG). 2. Januma Tiwari, son of Munna Tiwari, aged about 30 yeors, resident of Sharda Vihar, Quarter No.MI6-10/42, Korba. 3. Mohd. Anees Meman, son of Late Abdul Aziz, aged about 42 years, resident of Purani Basti, Korba (CG). APPEAL UNbER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES .ACT, 1988^^&AI^ST THE ORDER / AWARb OATE& 13.2.20D8 'PASSEb BY THE 2nd AbDITIONAL MOTOR :ACCIbENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL (FTC), KORBA (PRESIDEb OVER BY SHRI SURESH KUMAR SONI) IN C.T. N0.141/07 OF CHHATTIS^RH AT DIVISION BENCH: HON'BLE MR. I.M.QU&DUsI & MONSBLE MR. PMSMANT KUM,4R JJ. AppgllQrst B@SDondents M.A. ld No 1014/2008 The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Onkar Singh & others Prosent? AA.r. Abhishek Sinha, Advocate with Mr. ^. Patel, Advocate for the appellant. Mr* PP- Sahu a Mr. A. Saraf/Advocates for theresponaents. ORDEft (OraD \ (31st Mareh, 2011) 1. Heard. 2. By way of this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehjcles Act, 1988 (for short sathe Act'3), the appel'lant-Insurance CompGny has jmpugned the awar-d dated 1.3.02-2008 by ths 2nd Additional M.otor Accident Ciaims Trjbunai, FTC, Korba (C^) (for short 'the Claims Tribunar) in Ctajm NoJ41/2007 ailowinq ciaim application of the claimant, awarding compensation of Rs.4,25,000/- and fastening ijabilit/ on the appeJlant- Insurance Comp^ny to pay compensation. 3. PerrnJssion under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicies Act, 1988 (for short '"the [ Act, !988i) to contest the claim on ail avaiiabJe defences was granted to the appeiiant-InsurQnce Company^ 4.lFacts of the case, in brief, are that on 16.2.2006 at abouf 9.00 a<rn. clGimant Onkar Singh, who is working as Senior bumper Driver in Mcinikpuri CoJlieries of SECL, was going towards Njharika on his motorcycle anda when he reached near Rikando Road, Budhiyari Chowk, a mini bus bearing regjstration number C&12-9B37, being driven m rash and neqljqent manner by its driver/dQshed the motorcycJe of the ciaimant as a resuit he sustained qr.ieyous jnjuries on his right hand and other parts of fhe body\ He was admitted2 in 5ECL A4ain HospstaJ, Korba for preljminQry treatment and thereafter he was referred to Apo!io Hospita!, Bjlaspur vvhere he has underqone treatment for 3 months. The claimant has fiied claim application before the Claims Tribunal seeking compensatjon to the tune of Rs.14,80,000/- mainly on the ground of permanent disabfement sustaineds by him in the said accident, 5. On the pieadings of the partjes/the CIaims Tnbunal has framed GS many as fjve issuesand after hearing the partiesand considering materia! avaiJable on record albwed' the cfaim appiication and fastened hability on the aDpBitant" Insurance Company to pay compensation. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records of the TribunQl as also the fjndings given in the impugned award. Z On perusai of the record of the Ctaims Tribunai, we found that there head-on coliisjon between two vehicies j.e/motorcycle & rnjni bus, and the ?lace of accident is a turning point. It in the written statement fjfed by the appe!Iant Insurance Company that there negfigence on the part of the dnver of motorcycie but the Claims Tribuhai has not framed the regarding contributory neg'hqence^ 8. In yjew of the above, withou-t touchjng mer.its of'the case, .we are of the opjnion that the matter requirBS reconsideration at the end of the Claims Tribunai on the point of contrjbutory nealjaence/ 9. .AccordingJy, the js aJlowed, the impugned award is hereby set and the matter is remitted8 back to the Clajms TribunaJ concerned with a direction to the claim appJicatjon afresh after framing regarding contributory negligence and providing opportunity to the parties to further evidence, jf any, amend the pteadjnQS, fiie documents or verify the documents already fjled. It Is also directed that the amount, which has aiready by the appeilant-lnsurance Company and yet not dlsbLsrsed to th@ claimant, shaJI not be disbursed to 1tie ctajmant or refunded to the appeitant-Insurance Company till the disposa! of ciaim appiication afresh by the Ciaims TrjbunaL 10. The is albwed to flie extent jndicated above, No order as to costs, 11, Certified copy as per rutes, RoshanA Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge i Sd/- ] prashantKumarMishra Judge _