JUDGMENT :

Instant appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, lays challenge to impugned award dated 01.12.2017 in MAC Petition No.98-R/2 of 2016, titled Mohan Singh vs. Sh. Praksh Chand & others, passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Kinnaur at Rampur Bushehar, Himachal Pradesh, whereby tribunal below while allowing the claim petition having been filed by petitioner-claimant (hereinafter referred to as ‘claimant’) under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act (for short ‘Act’) saddled appellant/Insurance Company with liability to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.1,02,000/- on account of injuries sustained by the complainant in the road accident along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization.

2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that claimant instituted petition under Section 166 of the Act, claiming therein compensation to the tune of Rs.9 lac. on account of injuries sustained by him in the road accident. Claimant averred in the petition that on 14.12.2015, he was travelling in Maruti Car bearing No. HP-01-2979, being driven by late Surender Kumar, rashly and negligently. He alleged that on the date of accident, car fell into 60 feet gorge due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of car, who also died in the accident. He alleged that since he sustained multiple injuries on all parts of his body and remained admitted in hospital w.e.f. 14.12.2015 to 24.12.2015, he is entitled to compensation. He alleged that on account of injuries sustained by him, he has suffered disability, as a consequence of which, he is unable to do the horticulture and agriculture work from which he used to earn sum of Rs.15,000/- per month. He claimed before learned tribunal below that on account of injuries suffered by him in the accident, he is unable to sit and walk properly and as such, finding it difficult to maintain himself. Aforesaid claim put forth by the claimant came to be contested by respondents including appellant/Insurance Company.

3. Appellant/Insurance Company claimed that since vehicle in question was being plied in violation of terms and conditions contained in the insurance policy and at the time of accident, petitioner was travelling in the vehicle as gratuitous passenger, it is not liable to indemnify the insured. On the basis of pleadings adduced on record by respective parties, following issues were framed on 04.01.2017:

1. Whether the petitioner sustained injuries on 14.12.2015, at about 10.00 AM, at Shinti Mod due to rash and negligent driving of deceased driver, who was driving the vehicle No.HP01- 2979, rashy and negligently? OPP

2. If Issue No.1, is proved in affirmative, to what amount of compensation the petitioner is entitled and from whom? OPP.

3. Whether the petition is not maintainable in the present form? OPR-2 & 3.

4. Whether the vehicle was plied in contravention of terms and conditions of insurance policy? OPR-3.

5. Whether driver of the offending vehicle was not having a valid & effective driving licence at the time of accident? OPR-3

6. Whether the petitioner was gratuitous passenger in the offending vehicle? OPR-3.

7. Whether the petition is filed by the petitioner in collusion with the respondents No.1 & 2 ? OPR-3.

8. Relief.

4. Learned MACT below on the basis of evidence led on record by respective parties held appellant/insurance company liable to pay sum of Rs. 1,02,000/-, on account of injuries sustained by him in roadside accident along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization. In the aforesaid background, appellant/Insurance Company has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein to quash and set aside the impugned award.

5. Having heard learned counsel representing the parties and perused the material available on record, this Court finds that primarily challenge to the award has been laid on the ground that once it stood proved on record that at the time of accident, vehicle was n