The owner of a motor vehicle is liable to pay compensation for a motor vehicle accident if the accident and death are admitted, and no plea regarding insurance is raised.

JUDGMENT :

S.N. PATHAK, J.

1. Heard the parties.

2. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant-opposite party against the Award/ Judgment dated 18.07.2017, passed by learned District Judge-XIV-cum-Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhanbad in Title (MV) Suit No. 82 of 2015, whereby the learned Tribunal has allowed the claim application filed by the respondents-claimants and awarded compensation amount to the tune of Rs. 5,41,500/- and the appellant was directed to pay A/c payee cheque of Rs. 1,00,000/- each in favour of plaintiff-claimant Nos. 2 and 3 and another A/c Pay cheque of Rs. 3,41,500 along with interest @ 6% per annum in favour of plaintiff-claimant No. 1.

3. As per the factual matrix, on 11.07.2014 at about 05:30 pm while the deceased, Meena Devi, was standing baside Sindri Dhanbad road at Nunudih, a motorcycle bearing Reg. No. BR-17F-2820 coming from Sindri side in a very rash and negligent manner dashed her, as a result of which, she sustained severe and grievous injuries and subsequently, died in course of her treatment. Thereafter, the police has registered an FIR being Jorapokhar P.S. Case No. 244 of 2014 under Sections 279/304-A of the IPC against the driver of the said motorcycle. It was further pleaded that at the time of death, the deceased, Meena Devi was earning Rs. 4500/- per month by means of stitching and weaving of clothes at home. On ground of her untimely death, the family members of the deceased suffered loss both financially and emotionally and as such, they filed complaint case before the learned Tribunal for payment of compensation.

4. The learned Tribunal registered the claim case of plaintiffs-claimants as Title (MV) Suit No. 82 of 2015 and issued notices to the opposite parties.

5. Upon receipt of the notice, the appellant-defendant appeared before the learned Tribunal and filed his written statement, challenging the maintainability of the suit on the ground of law as well as on facts. It was further stated that no such occurrence ever took place as alleged in the plaint and as a matter of fact, another motorcycle had dashed the motorcycle of the appellant-defendant, causing severe injuries to her as well and that motorcycle fled away from the place of occurrence and only under misconception the plaintiffs have lodged the FIR against the defendant. The appellant-defendant had also pleaded before the learned Tribunal that the plaint is not maintainable since the Insurance Co. was not made party in the plaint and as such, on these grounds the plaintiffs are not entitled for any compensation.

6. Learned Tribunal, on perusal of the documents brought on record and after hearing counsel for the parties and upon going through the written statement as well as other documents, framed following issues for proper and just adjudication of the case:

(i) Whether the suit is maintainable in present form or not?

(ii) Whether any cause of action arose for this case or not?

(iii) Whether the deceased Meena Devi died in a motor vehicle accident caused by rash and negligent driving of the vehicle (Hero Honda C.D. 100) bearing Registration No. BR-17F-2820 by its driver?

(iv) Whether the driver of the motorcycle bearing no. BR-17F-2820 had valid driving license on the date of accident or not?

(v) Whether the claimants are entitled for compensation as claimed or not?

(vi) Whether the claimants/plaintiffs are entitled for any other relief or not?

7. In support of their case, the plaintiffs have examined two witness and adduced documentary evidences also which were marked as exhibits. On the other hand, the defendant had also examined two witnesses, however, he had not adduced any documentary evidences.

8. Learned Court below after hearing the parties and after perusing the exhibited documents and oral evidences, elaborately dealt the issues framed and thereafter, found that the claimants are entitled to receive compensation amount. Resultantly, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 5,41,500/- and the appellant-defenda