<^^/ c/ N THE> HONBLEHIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR M.A. (C) No. J^g OF 2009 (APPEAL VALUED AT Rs. 12.25.600/-1 JAPPEAL UNDER SECHON 173 OF THE MOTOR VEmCLES ACT. 1988. APPELLANT (NON- APPLICANT N0.1) ^^ ^•^. ^,^' ...^'e^ x..\^"" ^^ RESPONDENTS (APPLICANTNO.l) ( APPLICANTNo:2) (NON-APPLICANT N0.1) :l. :2. (NON-APPLICANT N0.2) United India Insurance Company Limited, Through Its: Divisional Manager, Divisional-Office, Main Road, Korba, Tah. & Distt.-Korba (CG) VERSUS Smt. Manbhawnfi-^Wd/0-Late Roshan Lal Mishra-37 years, Rampravesh Mishra S/0- Late Roshan Lal Mishra-20 years, Respondent No. 1 & 2 are R/0- Qr. No. L 34 B. Sim CoUieiy, P.O.-B.Sim CoUieiy, P.S. Jhagrakhand, Tah. Manendragarh, Distt. Koria (CG) >6^. . - .„ . „.., ^y Dulendra Puri Goswami, S/0- Kishsin Prem Goswami Sidar,aged-40 years, R/O-C. Sector, Rajnagar Tah. Kotma, Distt. Anuppur (MP) ^ HiaK COURT OF CHHATTIBaAHH AT BILASPUR M.A. ta N0. 1S26 OF 2C%)9 APPBLLANT/ INQN-APPLICA^T N0.1 RESPONDENTS Uuited IiAdia Iiisui'aiice Company Lmiited. Versus Smt. Maiibhawati others. aiid APPEAL U2TOBR SECTIOH 173 OF T! ACT, 1988 Division BeachsHon'ble Shri I.M. Ouddusi & Kon'bie Shri G. MiahalixddiBi. JJ. Presents SliTi Daslii'-atli Gupta, comisel for tlie appellant Smt. Usha Chandrakar for the respondents No. 1& 2. SI-ii'l Aviiiash Misl-ua, couiisel for the respondent No.3. ORAL ORDBR (Passed oa 18th day ofOetober, 20111 Per I.®a:.Ouddusi. J. Tliis appeal has been ffied agaiiist flie inipugned awaixl dated 28-07-2009 passed by ti.ie Additional Motor Accident CIaims Tribunal, Maiiendragai'ii, Distrlct Koria (for short <tlie Claims Tribmial') in Clalin Case No.91/2007, by the appellaiit/ Insurance Company. 2. Brief facts of tlie case as per version of tl-ie claitnaats are that the claiQiants/respondents herein are heirs of flie deceased Roshanlal, At the tmie ofaccldent, the deceased was workmg m Soufh Eastern Coalfields Liniited, Hasdeo Region. Respoudent No,3 was tiie owner and the appellaiit was iasurer of the offendmg vehicle fS/'espa Scooter). On 13-08-2001 at about 7-00 p.m., deceased Roshaiilal, after completiag liis work, was retm'mng from Rajnagai' Collieiy to his home on his bicycle. On the way, neai' Palkomada canal, he was daslied by the ofTending veliicle fyespa Scooter) beai'mg registi-ation No.. M.P. 26-D/7118 wliich was bemg driven by the driver of the offendiiig veliicle (Vespa Scooter), In a rash aiid negllgent mai-uier. In tliat accident, Roshaiilal sustauied vai'lous gi~ievous injuries on liis body, resultmg ui liis death 011 tiie spot. The report of tlie incident was given m tiie PoUce Station Bijui'i, Police Cliowki Rainnagai'-. 3. The clamiaiits bemg legal heirs/dependents of flie deceased had Hled a clalin petltion mider Section 166 of tlie Ivlotor VeFiicles Act (for short the Act?) before the Claiiris Tribmial, claliiimg a total ainount of Rs.27,00,000/- as compensation for tlie deatli of tlie deceased. 4. Leai'ned Clainis Tribunal on a close scrutiiiy of Uie evidence led, material placed and submissions made by fhe pai'tles, has awarded a total sum of Rs. 12,25,600/- along wifli interest @ 6% per aiiiium from tlie date of flliiig of tiie claim petltion tlll its payment, to tl"ie claiinants. 5. We have heai'd leai-ned couiisel for fl-ie paities aiid perused tlie record of tiie Clainis Tribunal as well as tlie impugiied award. 6. Leai'ned comisel for tlie appellaiit has submitted fiiat tliere was conti'ibutoiy negligence. Fuither, flie amouiit has not been awarded properly as flie question of compassionate appointnient gi'aiited to tlie dependent of tlie deceased was not considered whlle calciilatkig tlie quaiituiri pait. 7. With regard to coiitributory iiegligence, flie fact is that flie deceased was goiiig 011 bicycle. The plea was taken that tiie deceased had consmiied liquor but iii tiie postuaortem report, uothiug has been mentloned that tlie deceased liad consumed liquor. Therefore, tliis point is iiot sustamable 011 tlie basls of the evldence on i-ecord, it caiiiiot be said tliat tlie deceased had consunied alcohol aad fherefore, there was contributory negligeuce on tlie pail of flie deceased/cyclist. -r ^^^^ .\ <<;ai.j 8. However, we have found that the quaritum fced by fhe Clalms Tribunal is witliout consldering fhe question of compassionate appomtinent Furtiier, flie multiplier has been applied witliout following flie norms of the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court ui llie luatter of Sarla. VcmtOL (Smt/ cand athers tf^ Dclhi Tresnspayt C^rporatian and An^ther; repoited iii (2009] 6 SCC 121. Therefore, we ai'e of fhe opu-uon tl-iat tlie matter requires recousideration at the end of the Claiiiis Tribmial. 9. Accordlngly, we allow fhis appeal iii pait, set aside tlie impugiied award aiid remit back tlie matter to the Clalms Tribuiial to decide tlie claini petition on merits afresh, m the liglit of the observations made hereinabove. 10. Needless to mention tl-iat Uie pai-ties shall be allowed to ainend the pleadiiigs, adduce furfiier evidence, file dociiments or get the docuiiients verified etc. aiid ti-iereafter, tlie claiiii petition shall be decided on merits. 11. The parties shall appear before fhe Claims Tribuiial 00 29-11-2011. 12. The records of tlie Claims Tribunal sliall be sent back without fui'ther delay. 13. If flie amouiit has already been deposited, the saizie shall be kept iu a fixed deposlfc scheme of any nationalized baak uiitially for a period of one year and the same shall be subject to the decision afresh in fhe matter. However, if the amount is ak'eady witlidi-awn by tlie claimants tliat shall not be recovered tlll declsion all'esh is made. 14. No order as to costs. - Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge Kvr