.r ^i ,oooococoo^7^^? •Si'rsg8@B^sc| aJt.»>-:-^'Sy^"1 %"*.w.s^^^" |......,.-K^'»,- .., ^: , IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MISG APPEALrGI NO.^-C^?7200tO ^ ^ -J..^-.. .4 ,.}- MISC.APPEALUNbERSECTIONt730FTHEMOTORVEHICLE ACT, 1988 APPELLANT INSURER RESPONbENTS CLAIMANTS DRIVER OWNER 1. 2; ICICI Lombard, General Insurance Company Umited, Registered office: IdCI Bank iTowers, Bandra- Kurla, Complex, Mumbai, 4000 51, through its Legal; Manager, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited LalGanga Shopping Mall, 3rd Floor, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.). VERSUS Agobai Wd/o Latej Raghunath Mrai aged about 48 years. ^)^o i S/o Late Raghunath Mrai aged about30 years. Govind^Mrai 3. 4. Both R/o Village IBurjabahal, P.0. Tetalkhuti, P.S. Devbhpg, Tahsil Mainpur/District Raipur (C.G.). Nirbhay patel s/oShri Kartikram Patel ; aged about 24 years, R/o Village Burjabahl, P.0. Tetalkhuti, P.S. Devbhog, Tahsil Mainpur, District Raipur(C.G.). Ajbal Gond s/o Shri Baliram Gond R/o Village Salhaybhata, P.0. Tetalkhuti, P.S. Devbhog, Tahsil Mainpur, District Rajpur (C.G.). CLAIM IN APPEAL VALUED AT RS. 2.46.2007- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPTJR M.A. (C)No. 757 of2010 APPELLANT RESPONDENTS ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited VERSUS Agobai & others APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice N. K. Agarwal Present : Shri Sourabh Sharma, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Shivendu Pandya, Advocate for respondentNo. 3 & 4. ORAL ORDER (Passedon 09.02.2011) This is insurer's appeal against the award dated 28.04,2010, passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Gariyaband, Distt. Raipur (for short 'the Tribunal') in claim case No. 05/10, whereby and whereunder an amount of Rs. 2,46,200/- has been awarded in favour of the claimants alongwith the interest @ 7.5 percent per annum if award is satisfied within a period of ^NO months, and in default penal interest @ 9.5 percent per annum against the appellant/insurance company. Brieffacts ofthe case are that, on 15.05.2009 Raghunath (since deceased) met with an accident with Tractor bearing registration No. CG-04-DB-7624 & Trolley No. CG-04-DB-7625 as a result of which he succumbed to the injuries sustained in the said accident. The claimants preferred an application before the Tribunal under Section 166 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 30,00,000/- for the death of deceased in the said accident. The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the evidence led, material placed and submissions made by the parties, awarded a sum ofR-s. 2,46,200/- in favour of the claimants and as against the insurance company. Shri Sourabh Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the appellant would contend that: the deceased was sitting in the Tractor at the time of accident; the vehicle was filled with bricks and was iised for non-agricultural purpose; and as such, the insurance compaiiy cannot be held liable for payment ofcompensation. I have heard the counsel appearing for the appellant and pemsed the award impugned. Shri Yashwant Ram Patel (NAW-1) i.e. legal Manager of the appellant/insurance company has admitted in its statement that there is no mention in the FIR and Merg intimation regarding sitting of deceased Raghunath in the Tractor at tiie time of accident, there is nothing in the evidence adduced by the claimants regarding sitting of the deceased in the Tractor. The evidence shows that when the Tractor tumed tiirtle he came in contact with the Tractor and died. Further, the appellant/insurance company failed to adduce any evidence showing use of Tractor for non- agricultural purpose atthe time ofaccident. .,,,..^-^^. /V sl ^.^,. 1 % "^^ ^J %:'^^/' ^ 8. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, I am not inclined to interfere with the award passed by the Tribunal. However, I have observed that penal interest has been imposed by the Tribiinal which is not legal, and therefore, to this extent, I am inclined to interfere that the Tribunal was not right in imposing the penal interest @ 9.5 percent, accordingly, that part of the award is set aside and fhe amoimt of award is payable with flat rate of interest i.e. 7.5 percent per annum from the date of application till its recovery. 9. The appeal is accordingly allowed in part to the above extent. No order asto costs. Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge Sall^