i fa.^'Ai.yi. ^^ijSSi^.^. IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR c ^^j^ Misc.Auneal {Cl N0. ^c^ c' /2009 APPELLANT ^ ^ Reliance General Insurance CQmpany r^"?'^J< ^^- ...<^* ^^,^L^(' Through- Manager Lw"'"/.^d\ i"'"^*^ ^U>^ Ravi Bhawan, ( ^^^'"'^^'^ ilNSUI^Rl"m' ^;OBftnkw"" ^,...»•*•' a^-(-"" GE Road, RAIPUR (INSURER) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^ ^ ^\ r -^. h" s>"°t?^fffy ^l^" Smt. Vijiya Das w/o Late Shri Ashwani Das, aged about 50 years ^S^f ic^ ?>• ^\<^ ^ t^) 3J. Sanjay Das s/o Late Shri Ashwani Das, aged about 30 years ^r^ •MC^^ .^:4 ^Jjl ^ y/^ ^ ^ Dhanurjay Das s/o Late Shri Ashwani Das, aged about 28 years (claimants)^ ^r^i? T<»^\- ^ ^- LS, aged about 28 years (claimants)^ ^, 1\ ^ ^l>\n\ifj^\<^(>Ao^<w,IAeJA(^|p&3Wy S(WCU 1 LA ^XlJ^^'^^-7 \^^&CW\Wf^ (t.-<»\-3<L ^- > Ankit Kuainr Agrawal s/o Naresh Kumar aged about 19 years R/o Udiyapara, Saraipali, Tahsil Saraipali Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) (Driver) Ashish Agrawal s/o Jaiprakash Agrawal aged about 22 years R/o Saraipali, Tahsil Saraipali Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) (Owner) MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988 AS AMENDED BY ACT OF 1994 COURT OF CHHATTI8QARK AT BILASPUR APPBLLANT/ M.A.jq N0. 765 OF- 2009 Reliaiice Geuex'al lusux'aiice C/onipeny L-iTnite-ri ¥ersiis Saojay Das aiid others. RB8PONDENTS APPSAL UNDBR SBCTI03?? 173 OF THE R50TOR VBHICLBS ACT, 1988 A8 AMENDED BY ACT O.F 1994 iDivisiott Benchs Hoa'bie Shfi I.M. Quddusl & Hosx'ble Shri G. Mmhaiuddin, JJ.I Presesife : Shri S.S, Rajput, couiisetfor the appeUaiit. Shri C.R. Saliu, counsel for respondents No.2 & 3. Shii Sanjay Agrawai, cozinsel for respozidexit Ffo.4 &5. • GRALORDER . . (Passed oa 08th uay ofNoveaaber, 20111 Per i.M. Qiiddttsi, J. This appeal has beeij. flied by fhe appeliaat/Iasurao.ee CoiB.pany agaio.st the impugiied award dated 22-11-2008 passed m Clalm Case No. 82/200>8,by the Chlef Motoi? AccKient Claims Trlbunal, Mali.asaniuiid (for short 'the Clalnis Tribiiaaf), fasteiilng the liabllity to pey compensation agaiiist tlie reBpondeats includlng the appetiaut, joio.fly aad several3y. 2, Viie '!,A. No. 04, a CKjss-objectk>n Iias also been filed-Ijy the respondents No. 2 & 3 ibr eiilianceaieiit of'fhe compeusatk)ii, 3, Brlef fa<;ts of the .case,' as prqjected by the clalmaats are fhat fhe clakiiaDits/lespondents No.l to 3 hereia were wife aud sons ofthe deceased'AsIiwaiii Das. Responderits No*4 aiicl 5 were dnverand owner aad fhe' appellaiit/non-applic^aiit No. 3 was fbe irisuper of tlie offendiiig vehicle (Motorcycle) TVS XL Super HD beai'mg registi-aUon No. C.G.06-D/0295. On 04-02-2008 Ashw'anl Das (deceased) was goio-g to his hoio.e on hls Biotorcycle bearmg registration No. C.G.04-ZS/54Q3. At tiiat tiaie, oa the way, near Forest Circle Office, he'was dashed by fhe offendiag vehicle (ixiotorcycle) TVS XL Super HD bearifig registration No. ^^^^ ^:.<: ,f..r ^. .^. '' ^ c;.G. 06-D/0295 whlch was beiag diwen by fhe respoadeirt No. 4, iii a rash aiicl iiegligent Biaiinei-, as a result ofwhich Asliwaiil-Das fell dowii and sustaiiied grievous iujuries on his head, ear and nose. He was aclBiitted iii Govemjiiient Hospital, Sai'alpali froiii where he was referred to Raipur and .fliereafter, lii view of ftie seriousness of his condltion, he was adinltted ia Govenmieat , Hospital, Pith.ora, wher-e he died dur-iiig th.e cour-se of tlie treatQient: Report oftlie iiicident was given iui tlie Police Station, Saralpali and aii offence was registered under Sectloiis 279, 337 aiid 304-A of the IPC. After irivestigatioa, a chai'ge-sheet has been filecl. At the tmie ofaccident the deeeased Ashv/aD.1 Das was aged 55 years aud was earuiiig Rs, 7707/- per iaonfli, by workiiig as Tiiae-keeper lii P.W.D, 4. The claiQiarits beiiig legal represeiitatives of tlie deceased had filed a claim petitiou under Section 166 ofthe Motor Velilcles Act, 1988 (for short 'tlie Act") clalmmg a total aeiouiit of compensation of Rs.22,20,000/- 011 various heads, Ibr tilie deatli oftlie cleceased. 5. Learned Claims Trib-tinal oa a close scrutiiiy of the evidence led, niaterial placed aiid subiuissions Biade by the parties, has awardecl a total sum of Rs.5,50,720/- agaoist the respondents to pay compensatioa to the clalmants, iiicludiiig tlie appellaiit/lrisiuaace Coiiipaiiy, joiiifly aiid severally along widi interest @ 6% per anntioi froiii the date of fllio.g the claioi petttioii tUI its payment. 6. We have heard leanied counsel for tlie parties aiid penised tlie records of Uie Claiois Tribuual as wetl as tlie mipugned award. 7. Learned counsel for fhe appellaat has sxibiiiittecl tliat tlie iiiSLiraiice pollcy was iiiade effectlve with effect from 29-02-2008 £Uid was expii'ing iii tiie aiidniglit of 28-02-2009. The accldent liad taken place on 04-02-2008 I,e. mucli piior to flie clate of issite pf tlie iiistu-aiice policy. Therefore, leaiTjied Claiuas Tribwiial has comiiiitted liianifest •en-or of law. lo. liolding tliat tlie liability »a&oii flie Irisurer to pay couapensation to the claiiuants. ^^ssS^" u 8. However, from perzisal oftlie record, it is clear fhat Ex. D-2 is the Cover Note No. 200701932611 whlchwas issued on 30-01- 2008 at 4-30 P.M. froui Saraipali District MalAasaiuund aud the date of expliy of the insurance pollcy has been Bieiitloned as 29- 01-2009. In tiie Cover Note, flie engme aiid chasis iiumber ofthe vehicle have been nientloned aiid tlie descxiption of flie velilcle has also been meiitioned as aew vehicle (2 wheeler) TVS XL HD. There is a seal ariu signatare of4he authorized signatoiy also on the cover aote, It is notlced fiiat the same number of the cover note has been isientloned Le. 200701932611 on tlie iiisuTaace policy (Ex. D/l) but leai'iied coiuisel for tlie appellaiit submits th.at flie cover note (Ex. D/2) is fake. 9. This Court has graiited ample opportuiiities to lemTieel counsel for the appellaiit/ Insupzuice Couapaiiy to pioduce flie relevarit ofHce dociiiiieiit as the best plece o.f evideiice was wifh fhe appellaiit A copy ofthe Cover Note iuust have beeii seat to tlie Head Office, Mumbai froai whicli place flie policy was issued as flie saine Cover Note No. 200701932611 has been ULientloned oii tiie policy. It was the duty of flie appetlaiit/Insuraiice Com.pany to produce tlie office copies of fhe Cover Note wliLlch was tiie basis of preparation offhe policy by Mumbai Head Office, Time was also graated to learned counsel for tiie appeIlfeLiit to verify tiie driviiig licence fk'st 011 23-08-2011 arid flxereaiter, on 12-09-2011 aiid ftii-fh.er aii opportunity was also giveii to bring Uie origiiial records contaifciiu.g the origiaal co^er note 011 fhe basis ofwhlch the iusuraiice pollcy was prepaied vide order dated 20-09-2011. Fmtlier,on 11-10-2011, 17-10-2011, 02-11-2011 tlie tiuie was graxited but tUl today^ learned counsel for tlie appeUaiit has falled to produce tlie origirial office records. Therefoie, tb.is Court has 110 oflier option except to accept fhe contents of the cover note (D/ 1) as true as tiie same number has beeii iLieiitioned iii tlie irisuraace pollcy and once irji tlie Cover Note, ttie date of iBsuao.ee of tiie policy aad tiie date of expuy of irisuraiice pollcy has been iiientloued^ no oflier view caii be taken fliao. tiie view taken by tiie learned Clairns TribuB.al. The driviiig liceuce was also verifled aiid found to be valid by tiie appella&t, (! K?r 10. In view of tiie above, the appeal falls and is liereby disuuLissed. 11. The. cross-objectioD. ffled by tlie respondents No. 2 .& 3 is also disBiissed as tliere is no good ground for eiiharicem.eAit of fhe am.ouiit of coiaperisation. 12. No order as to costs. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge