IIIHSi IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G.1 ^-o M.A. N0. /2006 APPELLANTS ivn.yz^^ t) :1. ^ >-• 6 7. 8^ Smt. Fatima Begum Wd/o. Late Abdul Hakim Aged about 48 years Occupation-Home Work, R/o. Village Surajpur, P.S. &Tah. Surajpur, Dist. Sarguja (C.G.) Amjad Khan, S/o. Late Abdul Hakim, aged about 23 years, occupatio n-1abourer Kumari Gulsarina D/o. Late Abdul Hakim Aged 21 years, student Keshar Khanam, S/o. Late Abdul Hakim Aged about 26 years Occupation-home work Guljaha,S/o. Late Abdul Hakim Aged about 24 years Occupation-student Neha Parween D/o. Late Abdul Hakim Aged about t9 years Occupation- Student Salman Khan, S/o. late Abdul Hakim Aged about 19 years Nimmi, D/o. Late Abdul Hakim Aged about 18 years All caste- Musalman, R/o. Village Surajpur, P.S. & Tahsil Surajpur, Dist. Sarguja -s *.. RESPONDENTS VERSUS : 1. Hajrat Khan, ^ S/o. Yasim Khan Aged about 25 years Occupation-Driver R/o.Vill. Ajrima, P.S. Jainagar, at present Bhaiyathan Road, Surajpur, Dist. Sarguja (C.G.) 2. Branch Manager <^ Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Ambikapur, Dist. Sarguja (C.G.) MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT. 1988 •f HK3H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH. BILASPUR CORAM: Hon'bteShri I.M.QuddusS,J.& Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra. J. MA ^to.401 of 2006 APPELLANTS Smt. Fatima Begum and ottiers. Versus RESPONDENTS Hgjrat Khan and another. Shri Sanjay Agrawal, counsel for the appellant. ORALORDER (14/03Q011) Following oral order of I. M. Quddusi. J. tte Court was passed by 1. This appeal has been filed against the impugned award dated 24/12/2005 passed by the l Additional Motor Acckfent CAiims Tribunal, Surajpur in ClaimCase No. 60/2004 dismisang the claim p^ifion of the claimants. 2. Brieffactsofthecase,aspertheverston<rftheclaimants,arethat theclaimants/appellants are widow and children <rf the deceased Abdul Hakim. On 21/04Q004 deceased Abdul Hakim was retuming from Renukut to Surajpur in vehicle Jeep bearir®registration No. C.G. 15 B 0382. When they reached near Podi <uming the vehtele being driven rashly and negligently by driver Hqrat caused the accident as a result <rf whreh deceased Abdul Hakim sitting in tte jeep died on the spot. He ised to eam Rs.10,000/- by sellir^i flowers and doing the work of agent in bus 'stand, Claimants have claimed compensatfon <rfRs.34,00,000/-. 3. We have perused the Lower Court Record and found that the vehicle was insured against Package Policy for Zone B Private Car. L ..:I? ii'itei.-.-.;..-<s 4. Tribunal dismissed the claim petitton on Vhe groimdof nw payment of extra premium for the occupants including the owner of the vehicle in that private car. 5. The Insurance RegulatMy and Devetopment AuUiority (IRDA) vide Us circular dated 16th Novembsr, 2009 issued to all CEOs of Ganaral Insurance Companiesdrawingttieinsurers'attention to words of Section (II) 1 0) <rf Standard Motor Pacteage Policy (alsocalled CQmprehensive Poltey) for Private Car and Two-Wheeter uneter the (erstwhite) India Motor Tariff. Some circulafS have been referred therein also issued by the TarNT Advisory Committee on the subjectand ftwas obseived that ttie above cireulare make it clear that the insured's liability in respect of occupant(s) camed in a Private Car and Rllion Rider carried on two wheder is covered under the Standard Motor Package Policy and allGeneral Insyrere vrere advised to adhere to the aforementioned circulars and any non- compliance of the same would be wewed seriously by the Authprity. Circular is quoted as uncler - "INSWIANCE RB3ULATORYAND DE/ELWWBfT AUTHOfOTY Noven*erie,2009. ItefclRDA/NUCIWF&UWWIIfflOOa To CEOs ofall General Insurance Companies Re : Liabillty of Insurance Companles in respect <rf Occupantof a Private Car and PMion Rid<w in a Two-Wheetor under Standard Motor Package Polfcy [also cdted Comprehensive Pdlcy] Insurers' attention is drawn to wordings of Section (11)1 (i) af Standard Motor Package Policy (also calted Comprehensive Poltoy) for private Car -dhd Two-Wheeler under the (erstwhite) India Motor Tarff. For convenience the relevant provisions are reproduced hereunder: •SecUon U. LiaWIUy to Third ParUes 1. Subject to the limits of Bability as laid down jn the Schecftjle hereto the Company will indemnBy the insured in the event of an accidert caused by or areing out of the use of the insured vehicle agairst alt sums which the Insured shall become legatly liabte to pay in respectof- ^ \^ (i) death or bodily tnjuiy to any person inchjding occupantsjcamed in the vehicte [provided such oocupants are not carried for hire or Fewanfl but except so far as it is necessary to meet the requirements of Motor Vehictes Act, the Company shall not be liable where sucn dean or tnjury arises out of and in the course cS employment of such person by the insured." It is further broight to the attention of insurere that the above pnwisions are in line with the toltowing circulars eariier issued by the Tariff AcMsory Committee on the subject: (i) Ciroular M.V. No.1 of 1978 - dated 18*' March 1978 [regafding ocoupante carried in Prhate Car] effective from 25 Maroh 1977. (ii) MOT/GEN/10 dated 2ml June 1986 [regarding PitlKXi Riders in a Two- Wheeter] effective from the date of the oircular. The abow clreulare make it ctear that the Insured's liability in respect of Occupant(s) carried in a Private Car and Pilltori. Rider carried on Two- wheeler is covered under frie Standard Motor Rackage Pollcy. A copy each of the above circulars isenclosed for ready reference. The Authority vide cireular no. 06&IRDA/F&U/Mar<8 datal March 26, 2008 issued urxler File & Use Guidelines has reiterated that pendir^ further ordere the insurere shall not vary the coverage, terms and conditions, wordings, warranties, clauses and endcxsements In respect of couers that were under the ersbwhile tarifls. Further the Authority, vide oireular no.019/IRDA/NL/F&U/Oct-08 dated November 6, 2008 has mandated mat insurere are not petmttted to abridge the scope of standard covers avaiiable under the eretwhile tariffe beyond the options pennitted in the erstwhile tariffs. All General Insurera are advised to adhere to the albrementioned cireulars and any non-compliance ofthe same would be vtewed serlously by the Authority. This is issued with the approval of Competoit Authority. Sd/- (Prabodh Chander) Executh«Directoi" 6. In view of the above, especially fbr one of the occuparte of Uie private car who was the owner of the car himseff, the circular applies to him also and therefore due to package poli(^ the claimants of ttie deceased occupant owner of ttie car woukl be entiUed to compensation. 7. In view of the above, we allow this appeal and s^ aside the impugned award and remit it back to the Tribunal to decide ttie claim petih'on afresh in the light of the observation made above. Needless to menUon that the parties shall be altowed to amend the pleadings.adduce r ^ —^ further evidence, file documents or to get the documents verified ete. and thereafter decision shall be taken afresh by the Claims Tribunal. 8. The Lower Court Record shall be sent back wtthout further delay. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge •^9- B' •--•----1