IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, J.
Rajinder Kumar - Appellant
Versus
Vijay Kumari And Ors. - Respondents
FAO (MVA) No. 64 of 2022 a/w FAO (MVA) No. 45 of 2022
Decided On : 26-09-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. joint appeals from same unregistered vehicle accident deaths. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. tribunal awards compensation to dependents of deceased hrtc employees. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. mv act mandates registration; temporary expires after 30 days. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. parties contend policy breach by overload, non-registration. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. non-registration fundamental breach; insurer pays, recovers from owner. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. overload lacks accident nexus; acquiescence bars truck impleadment. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 7. mohinder singh compensation rs.61.62 lakh per pranay sethi. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 8. manoj kumar compensation rs.64.41 lakh per pranay sethi. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 9. insurer pays with recovery right at 6% interest. (Para 26) |
JUDGMENT :
Vivek Singh Thakur, J.
These appeals, for involvement of common question of facts and law to be adjudicated on the basis of similar evidence, are being decided together by this judgment.
2. Both appeals have been preferred against the award passed by concerned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals in two different claim petitions preferred by respective claimants on account of the death of two occupants of the car being driven by driver Rai Singh, which was owned by Rajinder Kumar.
3. Common facts in these appeals are that on 02.10.2015, at about 7:27 a.m., Manoj Kumar (deceased-victim in FAO No. 64 of 2022), Mohinder Singh (deceased-victim in FAO No. 45 of 2022), Kuldeep Singh, Rajinder Singh (owner of the vehicle) and Rai Singh (driver) were travelling to Shimla in Nano Car No. HP-68A-Temp.5592 and when the car reached near Tyala Da Ghat, near Bhota, in District Hamirpur, it struck with a truck No. HP-24D-2342 from back side, which was parked on kutcha gola outside the metalled road, leading to the death of Manoj Kumar and Mohinder Singh on the spot. Their postmortem was conducted. Regarding the incident, FIR No. 178, dated 02.10.2015, was registered in Police Station, Hamirpur, H.P.
4. FAO No. 45 of 2022
4(i). Dependents of Mohinder Singh preferred Claim Petition before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hamirpur by filing Claim Petition No. MACT No. 44 of 2016, titled as Pushap Lata & Ors vs. Rajinder Kumar & Ors., wherein after taking into consideration the pleadings and evidence on record, the MACT has awarded compensation in favour of claimants amounting to Rs. 63,11,599/- with interest therein @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the petition till its realisation with direction that the compensation shall be paid to the claimants by Insurance Company being insurer. This award has been assailed by filing FAO No. 45 of 2022.
4(ii). Deceased Mohinder Singh was serving as Senior Assistant in HRTC and his monthly salary was Rs. 38,105/-, as is evident from Last Pay Certificate Ex.PW1/A, issued by the Regional Manager, HRTC.
4(iii) Deceased was 45 years old. Claimant No. 1 is wife, claimants No. 2 and 3 are children and claimant No. 4 is mother of deceased Mohinder Singh.
4(iv) FIR in this matter has been placed on record as Ext. PW3/A, postmortem report has been placed as Ext. PW4/A. Insurance of the vehicle and Sale Certificate have been placed on record by owner of the vehicle i.e. RW-1 Rajinder Kumar as Ext. R-1 and Ext. R-2.
5. FAO No. 64 of 2022
5(i). Dependents of Manoj Kumar preferred Claim Petition before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-I, District Kangra, H.P. by filing Claim Petition No. MACT No. 65 of 2016, titled as Vijay Kumari & Ors vs. Rai Singh & Ors., wherein, after taking into consideration the pleadings and evidence on record, the MACT has awarded compensation in favour of claimants amounting to Rs. 65,30,488/- with interest therein @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the petition till its realisation with direction that the compensation shall be paid to the claimants by Insurance Company being insurer with right to recover the same from the owner of the car Rajinder Kumar. This award has been assailed by filing FAO No. 64 of 2022.
5(ii). Deceased Manoj Kumar,
Narinder Singh vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd. & Ors.
Driving unregistered vehicle on public road is fundamental insurance policy breach; insurer must pay third-party claimants but recover from owner. Compensation recalculated with future prospects, tax....
Insurance companies remain liable to pay compensation even in cases of temporary vehicle registration, although they may seek recovery rights against the vehicle's owner for policy violations.
Insurance liability requires valid vehicle registration; mere application is insufficient under the Motor Vehicles Act.
The insurer is liable to indemnify compensation even if ownership transfer is unrecorded; the burden of proving permit violation lies with the insurer.
The court upheld that claimants could be entitled to compensation due to negligent driving despite not being dependents at the time of the accident; the incident was ruled as an accident rather than ....
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.