!i?!?E"~i «.'-" IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR M.A.rONo. / 2007 APPELLANT NON CLAIMANT Chandradeep Singh S/o. o late Shri Tahbal Singh, aged about 62 years, R/o. Quarter No. 10 C , Street No; 5 , Sector -2 Bhilai, Tahsil and District - Durg ( C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. CLAIMANT< M^. ^ AZ ••\e- 2. y' Smt. Kamlesh Shamia , aged about 48 Years , W/o. Shri Puran LalShanna, Occupation- House Wife, Puran lal Sharma , aged about 50 Years S/o. Shri Govind ram Shanna, Both are r/o. M. P. Housing Board Colony, Nandani Road Bhilai, Tahsil & Distt.- Durg ( C.G.) r NON CLAIMANT. 3. The National Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office - Bhilai, through regional Manager, Regional Office Mobin Mahal G.E. Road Raipur (C.G.) (9 APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 QF MQTOR VEHICLE ACT W6H COUfa OF C^Wm^& H AT BIUtSPUR bXVISION BENCH HON'BLE SHRI I.M. QUDOUSI & MON'BLE SHKE SUiA ttINHA.R?&&IN. JJ. M.A. (O N0.849 OF 2007 APPELLANT REa»ONDENTS APPELLANT RESPONDENTS APPELLANT RESPONDENTS Chondradeep Smgh Versuai ; Smi. Kavitc Meshram A olhers k.A. (0 N0.8SI OF 2007 Chondradeep Singh Versus Smt. fomlesh Siarma & o'rtiers &-. •. i.A. (O N0.^2 OF 2007 CharKiradeep Singh Versus Smt. Sharda &evi & o-tfaers IS in all Present: Mr. Siddharth Rdlhod, Adv. for the appelloints in alt Ihe Mr. Raj Awashty, Adv. for respondent-Insurance Comptarty None for the other re^)ondents served. OR&ER (OruO (20.6.2011) Per I.M. Quddusi. J. 1. Heord. 2. M.A. (c) No.849/07 A 881/07 fited against -rtia mard dnlad C^.0a2007 possed in Claims Case No.48/06 & 52/06 respecti'/ely by 1he lenmsd 11 Additional AAotor Accident Claims Tribunat (FTC), Durg and M.A.s. (C) No.852/07 filed against the auwrd dated 16.8.2007 passed in Ctaim Case No.97/07 by the teamed 9 AdditionaJ Motor Accident Clanns Tribunot (FTC), Ourg are being diqiosed of by this common erder as all these oppeals arose out of The same accictent. 3. The cppeltant.. who is owner of Toyotn Qualis Car bearing re9istra1wn number C606-A-7313, has fited these appeab against •the impugned awards imposing liobility on him to pay compensation to the claimonts of the above claim caseson theground -thatno premkim waspaid of the oceupoHts of car 'K-sssfr:f31t:, /^-^.^ . '•S fi-> ^?-^.,.. '} 1 Ciisai. to the insurunce poliey and hence -tfae appetkn'it-owner is liable to pay amount of compensution to the ctaiimmts. . 4. Facts of the case, in brief, ant that on 22.5.2(X)3 the deceased persons were 9oin9 m Toyata Qualis car to attend Aanw^ at Sir^honghat, Mahara^itnL At about 5.00 a.m. when Itt^ rwwhed neap Atauda Police S'tution, bistrict Nogpur, there was head-on colliswn between the said car and a dumper bearing registration number MH36-184 as a reault driwr of Qualis Car namely Manoj Kumar,hissonoBd ®neRnvmdra®Rawi Ateahram died. The claimcnts of respectwe deceased hcwe claim apptications seeking compensation to the -tune of fts.19^0,000/-, Rs.25,50,000/- & fts.82,00,000/- respectivety for thedea-ttt of the deceascd perswis. 5. The teamed Claims Tribuntri, on close arutiny of evidence fed, materwl placed and submissions made by the parties, hns part-ly nlk>t»edthe ctaim opplications of the claimants and held 1he appellont-owner liable to pay compensoition to the clnimants. 6. We huve heard leamed counsel for.the pau"t»s.We have alao pcruad the records of the Ctaims Tribunat ds also 1he impu9ned awnrd. 7. Perusal of the records shows that inatrance policy of Toyata fiar VMS a packoge policy (comprehensive policy) and 1tiis fact hae rot been diqiuted by 1he teamed counsel for itie re^endent-Insuwnee Company. The Insurance Regulatory and Developnent Authori-ty has issued a circular dated 16.11.2009 making cloirification about the eircubrs isaied by -the Toriff Advisory Committee duted 18.3.1978 & 2.6.1986. The (^erotive part- of the Circular Qated 16.11.2009 is quoted herein below:- "The above circuhirs make it clear that •the insunince UabUity in re^ect of ocayant (s) cca'ried in a privute care and piMion rider corried on two-wheeter is covered under liie Standard A^o-tor Pdckage Policy. Therefore, this circukir is binding upon -the inaurance companies for 1he reason Ihat •the deceosed was certainly an occupont of -the private car ond in the aforesaid eiraikir it has been ctarified that the occupant in a privale car is covered under tha comprehensiw insurance policy. All Seneral Insurersare advised to cdhere to the afoFementioned cfcuiars and caiy non-compiiance of ihs samc wouid be viewad seriously by the Airthori-ty." '^•7 8. In view of above, since the deceased was one of the <wcupwits of -the private carand his risk was covered under thepolicy issued by the insurBr, it was not necessary to poy separate premium for the o<xupnnts. Thus, we are of the opinion •that the Insuronce Company is liabte to pay compensation ondnot the owner of private car i.e. appellant hepan. ; . , .. . 9. For -the fore90ing reasons, we allow this appeat cnd hold that thc appetlont- owner of Toyota Qualis car is not liable to pay compensnrtwn and that part of the impuwied award is hereby set-aside. W* further direct thatt- 1+ie Iwbility to pcy 1he compensatkwi involved m •the award is of •rtie reapondent- Insumnce Company. In case ony amount deposited by Ihe dppellant-owmer hos been wi'lhdruiwn by -rtie claimants, it will be <yen for him to recover ihe same from the insurer of •the vehicle. However, if the amount, so d^aesi'ted, has not been wi-thdruwn so far, itie appellant shull benllowed to withdraw the same. Rest of the conditions ond findin9S of impugned award are hereby confirmed. It is hereby ckirified that ctaimonts are free to exccute The caward against the insurer of the vehicle. 10. Before parting wilh the matter, uw would Uke tu observe •rtiad- it oppears •that in the cases of package policy (also known as 'cemprehensive policy') where risk of occuponts of a prwate car or piliion rider of a two wheeler is covered, the representatives of Senernl Insurapce Companicsa do not epprise Ihe Chims Tribuiwls about the instructions issued by the Insurance Regutotory ond Devetopment Au'thority and Ihe Tariff Advisory Committce and Iherefore •the Claims Tribunals cre fixing liabili'ty on the owner of a private vehicte in such cases. Therefore, the (tegistry is directed to send a copy of this order to all •the Oistrict' Jud9es of the State wilh a request to communicate -the same to all •the Motor Accident Cteims Tribunals functioning in their respective Oistricts. 11. The appeals are allowed to the extant incticated nbow. A copy of this order be ptaced in M.A. (C) No.851/07 & 882/07. ___.._ 12.. Cert'ified copy as per rules. Sd/- G .'- Roshan/- I.M.Quddu51 Judge Judge