IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A. fCl N0. ^^3 /2008 uws'OnB80^ APPELLANT/ Non Apblicant No. 3 RESPONDENTS/ laimants ?fe''. ^^ ,"? ^ 'a*"'": •»A ^' y v^ ^-' ^,-The New India Insurance Company Limited Branch Office, Shahdol, Through : Divisional Manager New India Insurance Company, Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS J-'< a Israt Fatema, Wd/o Late Vahid Khan, Aged about 20 years, R/o Line Dafai, Ward No. 10, Khongapani, P.S. Jhagrakhand, District-Korea (C.G.) 2.,, ^ Vakil Khan, S/o Rahim Khan, Aged about 45 years, R/o Line Dafai, Warcf No, 10, Khongapani, P.S. Jhagrakhand, District-Korea (C.G.) 3.^ I— Jamila Begam, W/o Vakil Khan, Aged a.bout 40 years, R/o Line Dafai, Ward No. 10, Khongapani, P.S, Jhagrakhand, District-Korea (C.G.) Non-ApDlicant No.l 4. -/' Non-aDDlicant No.2 5.. Deepak Das Panika, S/o Supat Das Panika, Aged about 25 years, C/o Sunil Kumar Gupta, Sunil Medical Store, Budhar, District-Shahdoi (M.P.) Sunil Kumar Gupt-a,S/o Homan Lal Gupta, Aged about 35 years, Sunil Medical. Store, Budhar Chowk, Budhar, District-Shahdol (M.P.) ^ MEMO OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLEACT ../ 1 HLGH CQURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR M.A. (C)No. 923 of 2008 Appellant The Newlndia Insurance Company Limited Versus Respondents Israt Fatema 8s others APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173_QFTHEMQTORVEHICLESACT, 1988 DB: HonUe Shri I. M. Quddusi & HonTale Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ ^ \a. Shri A. K. Athlay, Advocate for the appellant. None for the respondents No. 1 to 4. Ms Usha Chandrakar, Advocate for the respondent No. 5. ORDER (OralY ( Passed on this 22nd day of Februaiy, 2011 ) Per I. M. Quddusl, J. Heard. This appeal, filed by the Insuiance Company, arises froin the award dated 18.3.2008, passed by the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Manendragarh, District - Koria in Claim Case No. 62/2006, imposing the liability on the appellant Insurance Company for payment of conipensation awarded to the claimants by the irapugned award to the tune ofRs. 6,87,OOO/-. The brieffacts, in nutshell, are that on 5.11.2006 deceased Wahid Khan along with his wife Ishrat Fatima and sister Tabassum Bano was going to Budhar from Jaitpur by sitting in the jeep, bearing registration No.M.P. 18/7171.Thenon-applicantNo. 1 (Deepak Das Panika) was driver of the vehicle, non-applicant No.2 (Sunil , Kumgr Gupta) was owner of the vehicle and the vehicle was .*» insured with the non-applicantNo.3/Insurance Company. As per the version of the claimants due to rash and negligent driving of the non-applicant No.l the jeep met with an accident on the ta-irning of Mathiamroad, ahead Kamtagaon. As a result of this accident deceased Wahid Khan fell down from the jeep, he received grievous injuries and died on the way to the hospital. The claimants, being legal heirs of the deceased filed a claiin case under Section 166 of the MotorVehicles Act, 1988 for award of a total compensation of Rs. 40,50,000/- undervarious heads. Learned Claims Tribunal having regard to the facts and circunistances and the evidence on record awarded a total sum of Rs. 6,87,000/- as compensation along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the application i.e. 12.12.2006, holding the non-applicants jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of compensation. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the deceased was ta-aveling in the vehicle as a passenger. It was a private vehicle and the deeeased was an occupant hence he cannot be treated as third party, therefore, the limited liability of the insurance company would be applicable which was restricted to Rs. 1,00,000/- per passengers only. He invited our attendon towards the insurance policy to show that the premium was paid to cover the risk of 9 passengers of the jeep up to Rs. 1,00,000/- per person only. Therefore, the appellant/insurance Company is liable to pay only Rs. 1,00,000/- out of the total award of ^.-.'. ^ \-. conipensadon, awarded by the Claiins Tribunal by the impugned award. 7. Leamed counsel appearing for the respondent No.S/owner of the jeep is not in a position to controvert the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the appellant. 8. In view of the above facts and cu'cumstances of the case in which the deceased was sitting in the offending vehicle as a passenger and according to the insurance policy the risk of per passengers (total 9) was limited to Rs. 1,00,000/- only, the Insurance Coinpany cannot be held liable for payment of the entire amount of coinpensation. Therefore, we allow this appeal and raodify the impugned award dated 18.3.2008, only in respect of liability fixed upon the Insurance Company for payment of compensation awarded to the claimants. 9. It is directed that in accordance with the insurance policy, the appellant/Insurance Company is liable to pay the amount of conipensation to the clairaants to the extent of Rs. 1,00,000/- (One Lac) only and rest of ftie amount of compensation shall be paid by the owner of the jeep in question. However, the other portion ofthe awardshall remain intact. No order as to costs. '\ 'Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge ^ Thakur .'•» 1'Y \>