IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A'^No. o /2007 APPELLANT/ NON-APPLICANT .- Vinod Kumar, S/o. S.N. Agrawal, aged 40 Years, Occupation Service, R/o. Tirupati Road Carrier Dheemarapur Chowk, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS NON-APPUCANT RESPONDENT/ /•' aPPLICANT RESPONDENTS 2. Md. Idrish Ali, S/o. A. Haque,aged about 27 years, R/o. Aariinara Bahsdpur, Dubri, At present R/o. Dheemarapur Chowk, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) Dilip kumar alias Chukdau Age 45 Years, S/o Sahasram R/o. Chaurabhata PS Shivrinarayan, Tehsil Navagarh District Champa- Janjgir (C.G.) The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Through Divisional Manager, Raigarh, District Raigarh. Bhagatram, S/o. Shri Rainbharosh Kashyap, aged about 42 years, R/o. Chaurabhata, P.S. Sheorinarayan, Tehsil Navagarh, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) Vyas, S/o. Sahukar Kashyap, R/o. Budena, P.S. Janjgir, Tehsil Navagarh, District Janjgir-Champa VALdAi-io i-t o^ftcpefli. 4C-G-1 P-2- ?<,o,c daa/ •^-^'Q-Ste-- <rf»y"/ ' I'i,' ')-'£' NON-APPLICANT ^"5. > MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTION 1730F MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988 Being aggri! 1 ^/' HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BIIASPUR M.A.iCI N0.1142 OF 2007 APPBLLANT (NON-APPLICANT'. RE3PQNDENTS Vmod Kumar Versus Md. Idrlsh AU and ofiiers. M.A.iCl N0. 1413 OF 2007 APPELLANT (NON-APPLICANT3 Vmod Kvisiai' RESPONDENTS versus Md. Idrish Ali and ofhers. M.A.iCI N0.804 OF 2007 APPBLLANT (NON-APPLICANT1 RESPONDENTS Vlnod Kiiuaar Versus Md. Idrish Ali aiid otl-iers. M.A.tCi N0.805 OF 2007 APPELLANT (NON-APPLICANTI RESPOITOBNTS Vmod Kufliai' Versus Md. Idrish Ali and ofhers. M.A.iCj N0.306 OF 2007 APPBLLANT (NOH-APPLICANTS Viiiod Kumar RESPONDENTS Versus Md. Idrish Ali and oftiers. ?2 APPELLANT M.A.jCl ITO.1416 OF 2007 Vlaod Kum.ar RESPONDENTS Versus Md. Idrish Ali aiid others. M.A.(C) N0. 87 OF 2008 APPBLLANT (NON-APPLICANTt RE3PONDENTS Vuiod Kiunai' Versus Md. Idi'isli Aii and others. Preseat s Slii'i Suiiil Otwaiii Ss Sl-u'i Sushobliu.t Sii-igli, counsel for the appellant (in aU appeals). Sl'u'l Sonuiath Verma, coiuisel on behalf of respondents/applicants. Shri Abhlshek SInha, Shri Ghaiishyam Patel & Shri D.L. Dewangan, counsel for respondent - Oriental tasm'aiice Co. Ltd. APPEALS.UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT (Division Bench: Honl>le Shri I.M. Quddusi 6s Hon'ble Shri G. Mlsiha?uddin, JJ.l ORAL ORDER (Passed on 30U1 day ofJune, 2011) Per I.M. Ouddusi. J. The aforementioned seven appeals [M.A.(Cj Nos. 1142/2007, 1415/2007, 804/2007, 805/2007, 806/2007, 1416/2007 aiid 87/2008] ai'e bemg dlsposed of by tliis comiuon order as ftiey arise out the same accident occui'red on 19.10.2004 by fce offendu^ vehicle D-amper beai-ing registi-aUon No. C.G.13-ZC/0172 by dasliuig Tractor Trolley bearing registration No .C.G. 11 ZG/2199 mid C.G. 1 l-ZG/2200. / 'J 2. M.A.(C) Nos. 1415/07 & 1416/07 have been ffled agaiiist the awai'd dated 9-11-2006 passed iii Claim Cases No. 76/05 Ss 78/05 respecUvely and M.A.(C) Nos. 1142/07, 804/07, 805/07, 806/07 & M.A.(C) No.87/07 have been flled ^alnst the awai'd dated 17-11-2006 passed m Clau-u Cases No. 51/05, 63/05, 65/05, 64/05 & 52/05 respectively, by tiie leai'ned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaiijgit' (Chhattisgai'h) (for short flie ClaLms Tribunal'). These appeaJs have been prefen'ed by owner of fhe Truck (Viiiod Kuraar) bearing registratlon No. C.G. 13 ZC 0172 (hereu-xafter refeiTcd to as the offending vehicle'j. 3. Brief facts of the case, in aU fhe appeals, as piTijected by the clakuants are Uiat on 19.10.2004 certaui persons were returriir^ by Tractor TroUy bearing Regn. No. C.G. 11 ZG/2199 ai-id C.G.ll-ZG/2200 to ti-ieu' village from Chaiidi'apm- after Devi Dai'shaii. On tlie way, at about 3.00 a.m. near Tunarlaga, one Duniper bearing Regii. No. C.G.13-ZG/0172 (offendmg vel-ucle), wMch was behig driven by Driver Mohd. Idrish 'iri a rash and negligent maruier daslied the Tractor TixiUey, as a resijlt of vvliich 5 persons sitting 111 the Tractor Trolley sustained uijm'ies aiid died and certaiii o(l~iers have received ii'ULU'les. 4. The clalinaj.-its bemg dependents/legal representatives of fhe respective deceased persons as also tlie injiu'ed claituaiits llled sepafate claim petitions u/s 166 of tl-ie Motor Velucles Act, 1988 seeku-ig compentsation. 5. The leai'ned Claims Tribmial, on a close sci'utuiy of evideiice adduced, jiiaterlal available on I'ecord aiid submissions madc by fhe pailies lias helu fl'iat Aere was breach of condltions of tlie msurance policy aiid tliere was. -> ^) no contributory negligence on ti'ie pai't of Driver and owner of U-ie Tmctor TroUey. 6. We have perused the records of fhe Clakas Tribuiial as weU as fhe impugned awards and foiind fhat the liablllty to pay coiripeiisatlon has been fastened upon tlic owner of the Dumper bearing reglstration No. C.G. 13 ZC 0172, namely Vmod Kumai' on tiie gi'omid tliat oiily Xerox copy of flie drivu"^ Ucence of fce diiver' was filed, wliich cannot be believed. But the fact is that tlie deceased/inJLU'ed persons were traveUng in fhe troUey attached with flie Ti'actor beai'ing registi'ation No. C.G. 11/ ZG 2199 aiid TroUey beai'mg registt'aUon No. C.G. 11/ ZG 2200. There was no seatiiig capacily m tlie u'olley. The Tractor was also msui-ed for agi'icultui'al pui'poses, but fiie deceased and other persons sitting in fhe trolley were usmg flie same for ti'aveling pm'poses at flie relevaiit tmie aiid goiiig for Devi Dai'slTaii to Chaiidi'apm' aiid as such, fhe Tractor was not beliig used for agricultural purposes. 7. It is also to be noticed fhat fhe Insurance Coiapaiiy has not produced aiiy evidence to show that the Xerox copy of flie drivmg licence placed on record was not of a genuiiie llcense or tlie di'iver of tl-ie offendiiig velilcle was uot Issued a valid aiid effective drivmg licence aiid tlierefore, at tl'ie tkae of accident, he was not havmg a valid ai-id effective driving Ucence to diive the otTendmg veliicle. 8. Therefore, in fhese clrciuiistances, the question 1s as to how tlie owner of tiie ofienduig Truck is responsible to pay the amoiint of com.pensation? F'urfher, it is also a question to determine whether the Insurance Coiapany is also responsible to pay compensation hi su.ch cu'cumstaiices? _ -" 9. Therefore, we are of the opix'uon fiiat the matters requh'e reconsideration at fhe end of fhe Tribuxial as no Issue in fhe above r-egard was framed by tiie Clakus Tribmial and there is no finding about fhe saiue. 10. Inview oftlie above, we allow fliese appeals,filed by the owner namely Vuiod Kiimaj;', in part and set aside the itupugned awards and remit the uiatters back to the Tribmial for decision afresh. It wUl be open for fhe Claiius Tribunal to re-assess fhe qiiaiitum of compensation afresh after framuTg issues m fhe Ugl'it of obsei-vations made above and recording its fuidlng thereoii. AU the claim petltions sliall be consolidated aiid decided afl.'esh. 11. Needless to mention ttiat tlie paities shall be pi-ovided opportunity to amend flie pleadiiigs, adduce further evidence, Hle docmnents or get the dociunents verlfied etc., on fhe basis of the plcaduigs already on record. Thereafter, fce enquuy, if necessaiy, shall 'oe conducted by fhe Clakas Tribunal as provided in Sectlons 168 & 169 of Ae Act, 1988 aiid Riile 226 of tl-ie C.G. Motor Vel-ucle Rules, 1994. 12. The Tribuiial sl'iall also take mto consideration Uie prmclples of law laid down by tlie Hontile Apex Com't m pafa 11 of ils deuisioii ui Llie uiaLLer of Rafkuincir ws. Ajay Kumar & a.nother; reported ui 2010 (12) SCALE, wliicli is quoted as iiiider: "................................Sections 168 and 169 of tlie Act make it evident tha.i fhe Tribut-ial does not function as a neutral umpu'e as ui a civU suit, but as an active explorer ai'id seeker of U'utli who is requu'ed to liold aii enquii-y mto tlie claka' for deteriulaliig fhe just compensation'. The Tribuiial shoiild therefore take aii active role __ to ascertain the ti'ue and con'ect position so tliat It can assess the 'just compensation........" 13. The amouiit ah'eady deposited by tlie u-isuraiice Company s^iall rem.ain m deposit tUl fhe decislon afresh is taken by fhe Clalms Tribuiial. 14. The paities shall appear before the Clalms Tribmial on 28-07-2011. 15. Record offhe Claims Tribuaal sbaU be sent back wlthout further delay. KVT 1G. No order as to costs. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G.Minhajjudin Judge