•.-^^'-^•^•••fe J' IN THE HON'BLE HIGHS<ES6toRT OF CHHATTIsd^I AT BILASPUR ^.4- Misc. Aope^ {Ci NO^A6^>1 ^p" APPELLANT /2010 ^>Bajaj AUianz General Insurance ^ Compaay t.umted, Through Manager, Shiv Mohan Bhawan, Vidhan Sabha Road, Pandri, Raipur (C.G.) (INSURER) '•^.- ^aESPONDENTS VERSUS F) Smt. Devaatin Sahu Wd/o Late Nurendra Kumar Sahu, aged about 24 years, ^ Ku. Hemlata Sahu d/o Late Nurendra Kumar Sahu, aged about 05 year, tt.ftw^ 3) ^- Ges Narayan Sahu S/o Late Nurendra Kumar Sahu, aged about OSyears, respondent no. 2 & 3 minor ^SW*^"^^o)/.V^>-' represented through natural guardian mother Smt. Devantin Bai ^^Sffr^ is ;tS^ Smt. SushUa Sahu W/o Late Bisahu Sahy, aged about 55 years, All R/o Vfflage Ghoghara, Post Parsada Kala, Thana-Pingeshwar, Up Tahsil Fingeshwar, District Raipur, (C.G.) (CLAIMANTS) Tikamchand Sahu S/o Gopal Sahu, aged about 32 years, R/o Village Charbhatti, Thana-Fingeshwar, Up Tahsil Fmgeshwar, District Raipur, (C.G.) (DRIVER) Sitaram Sahu S/o Khorbohara Ram Sahu, Suraj, aged about 35 years, R/o Village Charbhatti, Thaaa- Fingeshwar, Up Tahsil Fingeshwar, DistrictRaipur, (C^.) (OWNERj ':, ^^ MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SEGTION173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT t988 AS AMENDED BY ACT OF 1994 HICBI COXJRT OF CatHATnSG^aH. BILASPUR DB: HON'BLE I. M. QinMDUSI & KOK'BLB Q. MINHAJUDDIN, JJ M.AtCl No. 1098 OF 2010 APPBLLANT RESPOIIDBnTS: Bajaj AUianz Qeneral Insuiaace Company Lunited Va. Sm.t. Devaatin Safau & others. MJMCI No. 172 OF 2011 APPEIAANT/NON- RESPONDBMTS: Bajaj AIUaaz Gpneral Insuraace Coiupaay Limited Vs. Oinprakash Sahu & two ofhers MISCBULAltBOUS AfPEALS UNDBR8ECTIOII 173 OPTHB MOTORVEHICLE8ACT, 1988 Present: Shri Sachia Singh Rajput, couasel for tfae appeUant Insurancc Conipany. Mr, C. R. Satiu, counsel for respondcnts 1 to 4 and Miss Aniiapiu-na Siagh, couasel for respondents S & 6 in M.A.C. 1098/2010. .^ .•...•'• . ' . Sbri C.R. Sahu, Coui^el for respondent No. 1 aad Malay •Kumiar Bbaduri, counsel for respoadents 2 & 3 ia M.A.C. No.172/2011. \ * . • . . -. ORALORDER (PaBaedoa09t11 day ofHoveinb»,2011) Per I.Wt. OUDDU8I. J. 1. These two appeals have been filed by the Insuraace Coinpaay against fhe impugaed awaid dated 30.06.2010 passed separatety by fhe A^ditional Motor Accidcnt Claans Tribunal, Gariyaband, Distriet Raipur iu Claim. Case Nos.81/2009 an<y <v r- 80/2009 in so far as it relates to fasteiuag the liabilily upon the appeUant Insuraace Compaay to pay coinpensatiQn to fhe ckiimauts. Siace bofh these appeals arise out ofthe same accident inet wifh by the Vehicle - Tractor bearfag Rega.No.C.G.04/ D.M-0523, fhey are beiag disposed ofby fh^ comiaon order. M.A(C).No. 1098/2010 relates to Clam qase No. 81/2009 (Smt. Devantin Sahit and others -vs- Teekcmwhcmd Sahu) in wbich a totel coaipensation ainount of Rs.4,76,400/ - has been awarded aad M.A.(C). No.80/2009 relates to Cbim Case No.80/2009 (Om Prakash Vs. Teekamchaad Sahtt -vs- Teekatachaad Sahu aad ofhers) iu whfch a total coiapensation ofRs.53,000/- has been awarded to fhe iajured claimaut. 2. Brief facts of the casc as per the vcrsion of ttie claiinants are ttiat on 20.04.2009 deceased Narendra Kiimar Sahu was coiaing fixixa Rajim by Motorcycle along-wifh his fiaend Ona Prakash Sahu as F'iUion rider. On fhe way, at about 12 noon near Bawakuti tura on Chautra Belar Main Road, a Tractor l^eariag Regn.No.C.G.04/D.M. 0523 which was being drivea by non-appUcaat no.l Teekanichand Sahu ia a rash aad negligent iiiaaner suddenly cut the tummg, due to which, thc troUey attached to fhe Tractor d^hed the luotorcycte, as a result ofwhich, Narendra Sahu and Oin Prakash Sattu befh sustained grievous iujuries and duriag fhc coursc of treatment, Nareudia Sahu died whereas iajured Oiaprakash Sah.u becamc permanenfly disabled. The Claim.aate ^ridow, chiM.ren and niother bdng legal ^ representatives/dcpendeats of fhe deceased Narendra Sahu .^se^s^.^^ ^c^ •ii'a liL c^ have fikd claiia petitions u/s 166 of fhe tfctor Vehicles Act, 1988 for fhe award ofa total compensation ofRs.26,50,000/- on various heads stating fhat at the time of aecident, fhe decee^cd was aged about 26 years; he was a Tailor and was eamiag Rs.300 - 350/- per day. The mjitred claimant Onaprakash Sahu has ateo filed Claim Petition fiw fhe award oftotal coinpensation afRs.8,70,000/- on varfous heads. 3. The learaed Claiias Tribunal haviag regard to fhe facts situation, material aad eyadcnce on reGord has held fhat ffae Vetaicle bearfug Regn. No, C.G.04/D.M.0523 driven by noa- applicaut no.l Teekamchand Sahu, m. a rash aojd negligcnt inaniter, dashed fhe Motorcycle, as a resalt of which, deceased Narendra Sahu died aad Oia Piaks^h Sahu becaiac permaaentty dteabled oa account offhe injuries sustained by him in tiie said accident; aad fhe claunants of deceased Nareudra Sahu are entifled to receive a total coiapensation of Rs.4,76,400/- and fhe claimaat iajured i.e., Oaiprakash Sah.u is entifled to receive a total coinpensation ofRs.53,000/- feoin fhe non-applicants jointly and severaBy. 4t We have heard fearaed couasel for the parties and have also gone throiigh thc records ofthe TtSnmal. S. Leamed counsel for tfae appeIlaat/Insia'Emce Conipaay argued that the Trailar attached to fh.e Tractor was iM>t .iasured aad as such, fhc tasurancc Conupany could not have been held liable to pay coinpensadoa as fhc aecident took place wifh fhe TroUey aad not fhe TBactor. 6. The Claim.s Tribunal has held fhat even if the accident occurred wifh fhe Trolley, Ito.e Insuran.ee Gompaay fe liable to pay cbna.pensatlon. Y ~~ \ \1 i»«^=L^---'.-...v.,• .•••>"'" '"^. '^ 7. The words "Motor vehicle" or "vehicK' Iiavebcea fhe Motor Vehicles Act in sectioa 2(28) wliicfa are reproduced as under: 2(28) "motor vehlcle" or '"vdMcltS xneans aay jneehanically propeUed vehiclff adaptcd for use upoa roads whethcr fhe pdwer of propiilsioa is traasnutted flieireto &oau aa extemal oc iQtemal soiuce aad includes a chasis to which a body has not been attached aiul a teailer, but does not include a vehick ruaiuag upon fixed tails or a vehicle ofa special type adapted for iisc oafy in a fectoiy or ia aay ofher ^iclosed preaiises or a vehiGle haviug less flian four wfaeels fitted wlfh enguie capacily of not exceediug [twenty five cubic centimctcrs]" 8. For the purpose of claim u/s 166 rf the Motor Vehicles Act, tfae negUgence of fhe drivcr of the oflfeading vehfcle M to be proved. The ^roBey' does not contaiaan cnginc and cannot be driven by any driver imtess it is attached wifh the Txactor - and ultimatety the driver of the Traetor would be responsible ia case of aay accideat even if it is taken place wifh fhe rear part i.e., TroUey. The above aspect has not been considered \ by fhe Tnbunal. It is also to be secn fhat whefher the Tiactor as weU as TroUey both are regMtered separately by the ·RpgistermgAufliori.ly under fhe Motor VehiclesAct andalso insured separately, Therefcwe, ia our opinion, the inatter requites reconsideration at the cnd of tliel^-ibunal. 9. Hence, we aUow fhese appeals iD.par4 set asnle fhe impugaed awards dated 30.6.2010 and remit the matters baek to fhe Tribitaal for decision aCpesh ia ttte l^ht ofthe observations laade above. ^' \1 H^ ( ^>'' '%. ^' "iiSf' ^'s^^ Cv" Rao ^ 10. NeecUess to inentioa fhat fhe partics shaU. be allowed to amend fhe pleadii^s, adducc further cvidence, file documcnts or get the documente veriGed eto., aad fhereafter the Tribunal after conductmg proper enquiry shafl make fhe award. The parties sbaU appear before fhc Tribuaal on 14th of Decenri>er< 2011. The records ofthe Tribunal shaU be sent forfhwlfh. No order as to coste. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sdl- G.Minhajuddin Judge