1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO.1042 OF 2009 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Through its Divisional Manager Aurangabad Divisional Office, Osmanpura, At & Post Aurangabad. .... APPELLANT V E R S U S 1. Yeshwantrao S/o Marotrao Kharat Age : 30 Yrs., Occ. Business R/o : Deshpande Galli, Degloor, Tal. Degloor, Dist. Nanded. 2. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Nanded through its Divisional Controller, Divisional Office, at Workshop, Nanded. 3. Syed Ahmed Syed Noor Age : Major, Occ. Business, R/o : Line Galli, Degloor, Tq. Degloor, Dist. Nanded. .... RESPONDENTS --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. A.B.Gatne, Advocate for appellant. Mrs. R.K.Ladda, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. Mr. M.K.Goyanka, Advocate for respondent no. 2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.1064 OF 2009 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Through its Divisional Manager Aurangabad Divisional Office, Osmanpura, At & Post Aurangabad. .... APPELLANT V E R S U S 1. Satyanarayn Reddy S/o Nagnath Reddy Age : 41 Yrs., Occ. Agril. R/o : Markhel, Tal. Degloor, Dist. Nanded. 2. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Nanded through its Divisional Controller, Divisional Office, at Workshop, Nanded. 3. Syed Ahmed Syed Noor Age : Major, Occ. Business, R/o : Line Galli, Degloor, Tq. Degloor, Dist. Nanded. .... RESPONDENTS --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. A.B.Gatne, Advocate for appellant. Mrs. R.K.Ladda, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. Mr. M.K.Goyanka, Advocate for respondent no. 2. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.1067 OF 2009 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Through its Divisional Manager Aurangabad Divisional Office, Osmanpura, At & Post Aurangabad. .... APPELLANT V E R S U S 1. Narsing S/o Yadavrao Biradar Age : 52 Yrs., Occ. Agril. R/o : Borgaon, Tal. Udgir, Dist. Latur. 2. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Nanded through its Divisional Controller, Divisional Office, at Workshop, Nanded. 3. Syed Ahmed Syed Noor Age : Major, Occ. Business, R/o : Line Galli, Degloor, Tq. Degloor, Dist. Nanded. .... RESPONDENTS --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. A.B.Gatne, Advocate for appellant. Mrs. R.K.Ladda, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. Mr. M.K.Goyanka, Advocate for respondent no. 2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.1489 OF 2010 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Through its Divisional Manager Aurangabad Divisional Office, Osmanpura, At & Post Aurangabad. .... APPELLANT V E R S U S 1. Shamsunder S/o Piraji Mankawar Age : 50 Yrs., Occ. Service, R/o : Tamloor, At present Nagreshwar Nagar, Degloor, Tal. Degloor, Dist. Nanded. 2. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Nanded through its Divisional Controller, Divisional Office, at Workshop, Nanded. 3. Syed Ahmed Syed Noor Age : Major, Occ. Business, R/o : Line Galli, Degloor, Tq. Degloor, Dist. Nanded. .... RESPONDENTS --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. A.B.Gatne, Advocate for appellant. Mrs. R.K.Ladda, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. Mr. B.S.Deshmukh , Advocate for respondent no. 2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 20/09/2010 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, these Appeals are decided at the stage of admission. 2. The appellant – Insurance Company has assailed the Order dated 27/04/2009 passed by the Ex-Officio Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Biloli, wherein the appellant – Insurance Company has been directed to pay the amount under ‘ No Fault Liability ’. 3. Mr. Gatne, the learned counsel for the appellant – Insurance Company states that the Tribunal could not have, at this stage, come to the conclusion that the offending truck was responsible for the accident only on the ground that the offence was registered against the driver of the offending truck. 4. At the time of determining an application under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the Court only comes to prima facie conclusion without recording the evidence. It is only after the evidence 6 is recorded, the Tribunal could have come to the conclusion as to who was rash and negligent in driving the vehicle, more particularly, when two vehicles are involved in the accident. Just because an offence is registered against a particular vehicle, that would not ipso-facto be a proof of negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle. It is a trite law that the Tribunal has to independently come to the conclusion about the rash and negligent act of the driver of the vehicle. In light of the same, the observations made by the Tribunal that as the offence is registered against the offending truck, as such they would be only responsible and liable to pay the amount and respondent no. 1 is not liable to pay the amount, is per-se ex-facie erroneous. The said observations can not be basis for awarding the amount. The present appellant – Insurance Company has deposited the said amount under the Award passed under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act. 5. In light of the same, as the appellant – Insurance Company has deposited the amount, the operative part of the said Award is not being disturbed, but if eventually if the Tribunal on evidence being recorded comes to the conclusion that it is a case of contributory negligence/composite negligence, then in such circumstances, the amount deposited by the appellant – Insurance Company pursuant to the order impugned, shall be adjusted at the time of determination of liability under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. 7 6. The claimants have been allowed to withdraw 50 % amount deposited by the appellant/Insurance Company. The remaining 50 % of the amount be transmitted to the concerned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and be kept in Fixed Deposit. The Tribunal is directed to dispose of the application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act within the period of six months from today. [ S.V.GANGAPURWALA ] JUDGE knp/FA 1042,1064,1067.2010