cr--^' Division ^ T N THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A.CNo.-^Q^/2009 APPELLANT SRANCH MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. SADAR BAZAR, JAGDALPUR, BASTAR (C.G.) Vrs. % RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANTS:- /' ^Y'' ...•^'"t' Y' ..-••;.p%. 7- .^•••;'<^''"^•^ ^•^ r^^ fl.y 4. SAHDEO BAGHEL S/0 JHITRU BAGHEL, AGE 45 YRS SMT. DEVALI BAGHEL W/0 SAHDEO BAGHEL,AGE40YRS. 3. KU. DAYAVATI D/0 SAHDEO BAGHEL AGE 15 YRS. MINOR THROUGH NEXT FRIEND FATHER SAHDEO BAGHEL, ALL THREE, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE TITIRGAON, THANA PARPA, DISTRItT. BASTAR, (C.G.) RESPONDENTS/NON-APPLICANTS 4. GAYATRI PANDEY- W/0 LATE ^ DEVENDRA PANDEY, AGE 20 YRS, RESIDENT VILLAGE TITIRGAON, THANA PARPA, DISTRICT BASTAR (C.G.), THROUGH AWADHESH PANDEY S/0 BADRINATH PANDEY, RESIDENT VILLAGE TITIRGAON, THANA PARPA, DISTRICT BASTAR. MEMOOFAPPEAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION^73 OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988 HIGH CQURTLOI>_CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR DB: Hon*ble I. M. QUDDU8I BB Hon'ble G. MINHAJUDDIN, JJ APPELLANT: RB8PONDBNTS: APPByjUIT: RESPONDBNTS: APPBLLANT: RBSPONDBNT8: M.AfCI. No. 1501/2009 Braach Manager, fhe Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Maagudu and others M.A(C).Np. 1SQ2/2009 Braach Manager, fhe Oriental Insuraace Conipany Ltd. Vs. Sahdeo Baghel aad ofhers M.A(Ct.iIo.lS03Z2009 Branch Manager, the Oriental Insuraace Company Ltd, Vs. Laxmiaatiti Patel aad ofhers MISC. APPBALS UNDBR 8BCTION 173 OF THB MOTOR VBHICLES ACT. 1988 Appearsmce: Mr. Sudhir Agrawal, counsel for fhe appeUant ia all tlie appeals. Mr, Maaoj Paranjpe, counselfor theclaimaiits/rcspondents 1 & 2 m M.A(C).1501, respondents 1 to 3 in M.A(C).1502 and respondents 1 to 4 in M.A(C). 1503 of 2009 Mr, Akhilesh Mishra, counsel for fhe owner/respondeat 3 ia MAC 1501, respondent no.4 in MAC 1502 and respondent ao.5 in MAC 1503 of 2009. [j ^•^.s"se: y^ \ Per I.M. QUDDUSI, J. ORAL OKDBR (29.09.2011} Siace these appeals adse out of fhe same accident met with by Coxniaaader Jeep bearmg Regn.No.C,0,18-0/0250, they are being disposed of by this common order. The III Addl, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jagdalpur, Distdct Bastar (C,G), has passed fhe separate awards on 31.07,2009 ia Claim Case Nos.182, 337 & 183 of 2009 againstwhieh these appeals have been filed chatlengiag fhe liabUity imposed upon fhe appeUant/ Insuraace Coinpaay. M.A(C). 1501/2009 relates to Claim Case No.182/2009 (Mangdu Ram Kashyap and anofher—vs-Smt. Gayatd Paadey aad aaofher) filed by fhe dependents/legal representatives of deceased Parmaiiaad for the award of a total compensatiosi of Rs.7 lakhs. M.A(C). 1502/2009 relates to Claim Case No.337/2009 (Sahdeo Baghel aad ofhers ~vs- Sint Gayatd Paiidey and anofher) filed by dependents/legal representatlves ofdeceased Nandlal for the award ofa total compensation of Rs.7 lakhs, M.A(C). 1503/2009 relates to claim Case No. 183/2009 (Laxminafh Patel aad ofhers -vs- Gayatod Pandey aad aaofher) filed by fhe dependents/ legal representatives of deceased Manish Patel for fhe award of a total coixipensation of Rs.7 laklis. Brieffacts ofthe case as per the version ofthe claimaiits are that on 22.02.2008 at about 3.00 a.m. fhe deceased persons Pamianand, Naadlal & Maaish Patel were toravelmg ia Commaader Jeep bearing Regn.No.C.G.18-D/0250 (for short "Offendiag Jeepa?), The said Jeep which was bemg driven by Devendra Pandey m a rash and negUgent mamier struck agauist a Mango Trce near a turamg, as a result ofwhich, ftie deceased persons along-wifh fhe driver died, The claimaats of the respective deceased persons have fUed separate claim ./",/"i"~~%.. '•% %w^^^?^^. ^ 1 <^ / / ^^..^•ff^"' petitioas u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeidng compensations, as stated above, on various heads. 4. Learaed Claims TribunSil held that the offendioLg Jeep met wiffct accident, as a result ofwhich, the deceased persons died on fhe spot; ftiere was no breach of conditions of fhe msuraiice policy aad the claioiaats are entifled to iteceive a total coinpensation of Rs.4,21,000/- in Claim Case No. 182/2009; Rs.3,37,000/- in Claim Case No.337/2009 8& Rs. 4,21,000/- in Claim Case No. 183/2009 with interest @ 6% per aruiixiii frora fhe non-appUcaats jouifly and sevexally, 5. We have heard learaed counsel for the parties at lengfh aad have also gone through the records offhe Tribunal. 6. The Tribunal has fastened liabilily upon fhe appellaat iasuraace compaay on fhe gmund fhat fhe Iiisixraace Conipaxiy has faUed to prove fhat fhe driver of the motor- vehicle in question was not havmg vaUd aad effective drivmg Ucence on fhe date of accident, but in our opinion, when the particulars of fhe driving Ucence were not faniished to fhe Insuraace Coiuipany or brought befbre the daims Tribunal it would not be possible to lead evidence about fhe issuaace of the driviag licence by siimmoniaig fhe of&cial of the concemed R.T.O. 7. It is relevant here to perase the provisions of section 134 of fhe Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 wfaich stipuJates diily of driver ia case of accident aad mjiiry to a person. It fiirther provides that: <<When aay person is injured or any property of a fhird party is damaged, as a result of an accideaait ia which a inotor vehicle is iavolyed, fhe driver of the vehicle or other person m. charge offhe vehicle shall— (a) unless it is not practicabte to do so on accoiMit of inob fury or aay ofher reason beyond his control, take aU reasonable steps to secua^e xnedical attention for fhe injured person, [by conveying him to fhe nearcst inedical practitioner ar ^3/ ^w:^^ ;7-'..^y^^" hospital, and it shall be titie duty of evexy registered inedical practioiier or fhe doctor on duty ia the hospital iimnediately to attend to the iajured person and render medical aid or treatment wifhout waiting for aay procedural foroialities, unless the iajixred person or his giiardian, ia case he is a laiaor, desires ofherwise; (b) give on deinaxid by a police officer aay iaformation required by hmi, or, if no police officer is present, report the circimistaxxces of fhe occurrence, iachidiEig fhe circuiiistaaces, if aay, for not takmg reasonable steps to secure laedical attention as reqiiired under clause (a), at fhe nearest poUce sta.tion as soon as possibte, aad iii any case wifhia twenly-four hours of the occurrence; (c) give fhe foUowixig iaformation ia writing to the iasurer, who has issued fhe certificates of iiisurance, about fhe occurrence of fhe accddeiit, naoiely:— (i) iasuraiice poUcy number aad period of its vaUdily; (u) date, time aad place of acdident; (iii) pardculars of fhe person iajured or killed ia fhe accident; (iv) naine of the driver and the particulars of fhe driviag Ucence, Explanaiion.— For the piirposes of this section the expression "driver" iaeludes the owner of the vehicle." A bare reading offhe above provisions would show fhat clause (c) of Section 134 provides that ia case of death of fhe driver, it is fhe du1y of fhe owner of fhe vehicle or atleast the legal heirs of ftie driver to give particulars of fhe driviiig Ucence, Therefore, ia absence of "aay particulars of drimng Uceace", fhe insuraace compaay has wrongly held fhat fhe burden was "^ on the iasiiraace coaipany to prove fhat driver of fhe vehMe was haviag a valid aad effective driving Mcnece on fhe date of accident. Any how fhe conditions offhe iasuraiice policy were also liable to be considered aad speci&caUy whefher the iasuraace compaay had a Umited liabiUty iii law. Therefore, ia our opmion^ it is a fit case to remit fhe matter back to the Tnbunal for decision a&esh, 8« Hence, we allow this appeal ia part aad ^einit fhe matter back to fhe Tribunal for decision afresh ia fhe l^ht of the above observations niade hereia. above. 9. Needless to inentk>n fhat fhe parties shaU be allowed to aiaend fhe pleadia.gs, adduce furftier evidence, file the doeuinents or get fhe docuiiients verified etc aaid fhereafter the decision shall be taken afresh at the earUest preferably wifhia a period of3 inonths, 10. The parties shall appear before the Tdbunal on 16th November, 2011. The records of the Tdbunal shall be sent back without further delay, No order as to cost(s), Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge