Amendment under Order VI Rule 17 rejected in claim petition as it altered fundamental nature from passenger death in goods vehicle to crushing of labourer, lacked due diligence, contradicted FIR, and prejudiced insurer post-reply.

The present petition arises out of the order dated 28.08.2025, as passed by the learned Additional District Judge(II), Shimla, H.P., whereby the application filed by the claimants/petitioners for the amendment of the petition has been ordered to be dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the claimants/petitioners filed petition before the learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Rohru, District Shimla, H.P. by filing Claim Petition bearing case M.A.C.T/3/2024, titled as Kamla & others vs. Ajay Sauhta & another. It was claimed in the Claim Petition that Sh. Jai Bahadur Budha father of the petitioners died in an accident on 10.09.2023 at about 6.00 p.m when he was returning back to his home after completing his work in a vehicle bearing No. HP63-7198 (Truck-Tipper). It was stated that driver of the truck namely Dinesh son of Sh. Ramesh,r/o Sukeda, Nepal, c/o Ajay Sauhta, r/o VPO Dhar, Tehsil Jubbal, District Shimla, H.P. was driving the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and he could not control it and as a result of which truck fell down from the road in a ditch. The deceased received serious and grievous injuries on his head . The successors of deceased Sh. Jai Bahadur filed the Claim Petition for the grant of compensation to the tune of Rs.50,00,000/- (Fifty lacs) alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the accident till its realization.

3. The petition was contested by the present respondent No.2- The New India Assurance Company Ltd. through its Deputy Manager, Divisional Office, 3rd Floor, Block No.7,SDA Complex, Shimla,HP. It was categorically submitted by the New India Assurance Company(Respondent No.2) that the Claim Petition is not maintainable in its present form. It was stated that the deceased Driver, who was driving the vehicle No. HP-63-7198 at the time of accident on 10.09.2023, was not holding any valid and effective driving licence. It was averred that since driver of the vehicle was not having any valid and effective driving licence, therefore, there is gross violation of conditions of insurance policy. It was stated that the insured vehicle being a heavy goods vehicle (Truck-Tipper) which was carrying unauthorized gratuitous passengers, was empty at the time of accident and no goods whatsoever were found loaded in it at the time of accident. Seven persons including driver were travelling in this vehicle at the time of accident. Amongst them, three had died while four other have received injuries.

4. It is further submitted that this vehicle being heavy goods vehicle (Tipper) is specifically meant for carrying construction material like sand and stone etc. and not designed for carrying passengers and having seating capacity of three person only. It was further submitted that the owner had allowed all these persons being his labourers to travel in this vehicle and has thus knowingly and willfully disobeyed the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. Therefore, this is a fundamental breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy, thus liability for payment of compensation, if any is of the respondent/owner only.

5. Pursuant to the filing of the reply by the Assurance Company, the claimants /petitioners filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C for the amendment of the claim petition. By virtue of this ap