Back
2019 Supreme(Jhk) 1402
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
S.N. Pathak, J.
Reliance General Insurance Company Limited - Appellant
Versus
Pairan Bibi @ Pauyatan Bibi - Respondent
Miscellaneous Appeal No. 14 of 2013
Decided On : 23-01-2019
A.K. Das, Adv., Asadul Haque, Adv.
The court established the liability under the Motor Vehicles Act for compensation due to rash and negligent driving, rejecting the argument of contributory negligence.
Headnote:
Motor Accident Claim - Compensation - Motor Vehicles Act - [Motor Vehicles Act, Sections 140, 163A, 166] - The court awarded compensation to the claimants under the Motor Vehicles Act, Sections 140, 163A, and 166, after finding the appellant liable for the accident and death of the deceased due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle. The court rejected the appellant's argument of contributory negligence and directed the appellant to pay the awarded amount within a month.
Fact of the Case:
The appeal was filed against an award passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Pakur, in favor of the claimants who were the parents of the deceased. The deceased, a tempo driver, was fatally injured in a road accident caused by another tempo driver's rash and negligent driving.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the claimants entitled to compensation and directed the appellant to pay the awarded amount within a month, rejecting the appellant's argument of contributory negligence.
Issues: The issues included the maintainability of the claim petition, the validity of the cause of action, the driver's license status, the rash and negligent driving, the cause of the deceased's death, insurance coverage, and the liability for compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held the appellant liable for the accident and death of the deceased due to rash and negligent driving, rejecting the argument of contributory negligence and directing the appellant to pay the awarded amount within a month.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was directed to pay the entire awarded amount to the claimants within a month.
JUDGMENT
S N Pathak, J. - This appeal has been preferred against the Award dated 20.03.2012 passed by Additional District Judge-I-cum-Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Pakur in Motor Vehicle Claim Case No.15 of 2010, whereby and whereunder he has been pleased to allow the claim of the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 7,68,000/- to the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 within a month w.e.f. 20.03.2012 and if the amount is not paid within stipulated period the respondent Nos.1 & 2 are entitled for penal interest @ 9 % per annum w.e.f. 20.03.2012 till date of payment and they are also entitled for realization of amount through process of law.
2. As per the claim petition, the claimants are parents of deceased Jamir Momin and according to the claim petition, the deceased Jamir Momin aged about 19 years was a permanent Khalasi of three wheeler tempo bearing No. JH 16 A 2772 and was employed by Ajijur Rehman and earning Rs. 6000/- per month as Khalasi-cumconductor. On 22.02.2010 at about 12:15 PM at Pakur Hiranpur Main Road under Village Shaharkol, P.S. Pakur, District Pakur, the said three wheeler was going towards Hiranpur and at village Shaharkol, the passengers were getting down from the tempo and the deceased also got down from the vehicle and was collecting fare from the passengers when another tempo bearing No. JH 16 A 1342 being driven rashly and negligently dashed the deceased and he received severe injuries on his vital parts and succumbed. The offending Tempo having Registration No. JH 16 A 1342 was owned by one Dolores Marandi and being driven by Sanatan Das @ Ajay Das and was insured with Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. The claimants have claimed Rs. 9,31,000/- with interest.
3. The owner of the vehicle has stated in her written statement that allegation is false and baseless. She has also stated that claimants have no valid cause of action and no document regarding age, occupation and income of the deceased has been filed. She has also denied the involvement of her vehicle in the accident. She has also denied the claim amount and other facts mentioned in the claim petition. She has however admitted that the driver Sanatan Das was having valid and effective driving licence and her vehicle was insured with Reliance General Insurance Company and the policy was valid from 17.02.2010 to 16.02.2011.
4. The respondent No.3-Relianace General Insurance Company Ltd. appellant has stated in its written statement that the driver was not having valid /effective driving licence. It has also stated that it has no knowledge of the accident and the insurance policy is not verified and it reserves the right to file additional written statement after verification. However, no additional written statement was filed.
5. The parties appeared before the Tribunal and were heard. After examining the witnesses and perusing the evidences on record, the learned Tribunal framed the followings issues:-
I) Whether the claim petition as framed is maintainable ?
II) Whether the claimant has valid cause of action for filing the claim petition ?
III) Whether the driver had the valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident ?
IV) Whether the driver was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently ?
V) Whether the deceased Jamir Momin died due to the rash and negligent driving of the vehicle bearing registration No. JH 16 A 1342 ?
VI) Whether the vehicle bearing Registration No. JH 16 A 1342 was insured at the time of accident ?
VII) Whether the claimant is entitled to get compensation as claimed, if so to what extent ?
VIII) Whether the owner or the insurer of the vehicle is liable to pay compensation ?
6. Learned Tribunal after perusal of the records and examining the evidences and after hearing learned counsel for the parties, came to a finding that the claimants are entitled for compensation to the tune of Rs. 7,68,000/- within a month w.e.f. 20.03.2012 and if the amount is not paid within stipulated period the r
