IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Radhakishan Agrawal, J.
Divisional Manager - Appellant
Versus
Himmat Joshi, S/o Late Rewa Ram Joshi - Respondents
MAC No. 710 of 2016, MAC No. 711 of 2016, MAC No. 715 of 2016, MAC No. 716 of 2016, MAC No. 717 of 2016, MAC No. 718 of 2016, MAC No. 814 of 2016, MAC No. 1242 of 2016, MAC No. 1243 of 2016, MAC No. 1244 of 2016, MAC No. 1245 of 2016,
Decided On : 02-09-2024
(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Section 166 – Compensation claims arising from a motor vehicle accident – Multiple claim petitions filed for compensation due to deaths resulting from a collision between a Maruti Van and a Truck – Tribunal awarded varying amounts of compensation based on evidence presented – Insurance Company contested the validity of the driver's license and the negligence of the deceased driver – The court found the driver's license valid and the deceased driver not negligent. (Paras 1-18)
(B) Liability of Insurance Company – The court held that the Insurance Company failed to prove that the driver of the offending vehicle was negligent or that the license was fake, thus affirming the Tribunal's decision to hold the Insurance Company liable for compensation. (Paras 10-13)
(c) Future Prospects – The court modified the percentage of future prospects applicable to the deceased based on their age, aligning with Supreme Court precedents. (Paras 16-17)
Facts of the case:
The appeals arose from a tragic accident on 13.12.2010, resulting in multiple fatalities. The claimants sought compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the Tribunal's findings regarding the validity of the driver's license and the absence of contributory negligence by the deceased driver. Issues: The main issues included the validity of the driver's license and the determination of negligence in the accident.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Insurance Company did not meet its burden of proof regarding the alleged fake license and that the deceased driver was not negligent.
Result: Appeals allowed in part, with modifications to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
JUDGMENT :
Radhakishan Agrawal, J.
1.As all the appeals filed by Insurance Company & claimants respectively arise out of the impugned awards dated 17.03.2016 passed by the 6th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, District Durg, C.G. in separate Claim Case No.102/2011 (MAC No.710/2016), Claim Case No.101/2011 (MAC No.711/2016 & MAC No.1243/2016), Claim Case No.95/2011 (MAC No.715/2016), Claim Case No.103/2011 (MAC No.716/2016 & MAC No.1245/2016), Claim Case No.100/2011 (MAC No.717/2016 & MAC No.1242/2016), Claim Case No.88/2011 (MAC No.718/2016 & MAC No.1244/2016) & Claim Case No.98/2011 (MAC No.814/2016), involving the same accident, therefore, they are being heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.
2.As per averments made in the claim petitions, on 13.12.2010 at about 8:30 pm, deceased persons after attending the engagement ceremony at village Lavar, were returning to their village Potiya by sitting in Maruti Van bearing registration No.CG04-B-3004, which was being driven by deceased-Gopal Tandon. However, on the way, when they reached Hathband Kamta Road near Crusher Machine, non-applicant No.1 / driver of the Truck bearing registration No.CG04-ZC-4052 (hereinafter called as 'offending vehicle'), by driving the same in rash and negligent manner, dashed the said Maruti Van, as a result of which, deceased persons, who were sitting in the said Maruti Van, sustained grievous injuries over their bodies and died. At the time of accident, offending vehicle was owned by non-applicant No.2 and insured with non-applicant No.3.
3.On account of death of deceased- Dovendra Kumar Joshi, a claim petition i.e. Claim Case No.102/2011 (MAC No.710/2016) was filed by the claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.24,70,000/- under various heads. The learned 6th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, District Durg, C.G., after considering the evidence led by the parties, by the impugned award granted a total compensation of Rs.10,54,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a from the date of application till its realization while fastening the liability on the Insurance Company / non-applicant no.3.
On account of death of deceased- Sawant Joshi, a claim petition i.e. Claim Case No.101/2011 (MAC No.711/2016 & MAC No.1243/2016) was filed by the claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.26,70,000/- under various heads. The learned 6th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, after considering the evidence led by the parties, by the impugned award granted a total compensation of Rs.11,54,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of application till its realization while fastening the liability on the Insurance Company / non-applicant no.3.
On account of death of deceased- Gopal Tondan, a claim petition i.e. Claim Case No.95/2011 (MAC No.715/2016) was filed by the claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.40,00,000/- under various heads. The learned 6th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, District Durg, C.G., after considering the evidence led by the parties, by the impugned award granted a total compensation of Rs.12,64,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a from the date of application till its realization while fastening the liability on the Insurance Company/non-applicant no.3.
On account of death of deceased- Raju Joshi, a claim petition i.e. Claim Case No.103/2011 (MAC No.716/2016 & MAC No.1245/2016) was filed by the claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.63,20,000/- under various heads. The learned 6th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, District Durg, C.G., after considering the evidence led by the parties, by the impugned award granted a total compensation of Rs.12,64,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a from the date of application till its realization while fastening the liability on the Insurance Company/non-applicant no.3.
On account of death of deceased- Golu Joshi, a claim
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Geeta Bhat and Ors. AIR 2008 SC 1837
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Swaran Singh and others (2004) 3 SCC 297
Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and others (2018) 18 SCC 130
Smt. Sarla Verma and others VS. Delhi Transport Corporation and another
The court affirmed the validity of the driver's license and ruled that the Insurance Company failed to prove negligence, thus holding it liable for compensation.
The court ruled that the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation first, despite the driver's invalid license, and established guidelines for calculating future prospects and multipliers in co....
Insurance company is not liable for compensation when driver lacks valid endorsement for hazardous goods transport, reversing Claims Tribunal's decision.
Insurance companies must prove policy breaches to avoid liability; interest on future prospects in compensation claims is impermissible.
A learner's license does not preclude insurance liability if the driver is accompanied by a licensed instructor, and the insurer must prove policy violations to avoid liability.
The court upheld the Tribunal's liability determination, affirming that a driver with a valid LMV license can operate a transport vehicle under 7500 kg without an endorsement, and modified future pro....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.