IMPORTANT POINT
In composite accidents involving multiple vehicles, both vehicles are liable for compensation, and the owner of an uninsured vehicle is also responsible for the awarded amount.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.

All these matters are arising out of the same accident however, different awards have been passed for the different claimants and in view of that all these appeals have been tagged together by co-ordinate bench of this Court and as such all the appeals have been heard together with the consent of the parties.

M.A. No. 474 of 2018

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants, learned counsel appearing for the respondents/claimants, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/owner of the bolero and learned counsel appearing for the respondent/owner of the auto in question.

3. M.A. No.474 of 2018 has been filed by the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment/award dated 16.01.2018 passed by learned District Judge III-cum-Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhanbad in Title (M.V.) Case (Motor Accident Claim Case) No.335 of 2015.

4. Mr. Alok Lal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that this case has been instituted by the claimants on account of a road accident death of one Naresh Rakshit which was happened on 10.12.2011 at about 5:00 AM along with other passengers travelling in Tempo. He submits that the claimants claimed that the deceased on that day was travelling on a Tempo bearing Registration No. JH-10U-7236 along with other co-passengers and due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Mahindra Bolero bearing Registration No. JH-09M-5859 came with high speed from Dhanbad side by rash and negligently dashed upon the tempo as a result of which one passenger of the said tempo was died on the spot and other passengers were sustained injuries due to said accident and on this background the claim case was filed.

5. He submits that the learned Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.11,73,155/- with interest @ 6% to be paid within 60 days and if not paid within the 60 days further interest of 9% shall be paid. He submits that there was a composite accident due to the negligence of Bolero driver, who have dashed into the auto and as such the insurance company of auto is not liable. According to him, the driver of Bolero was fully in rash and negligent driving, in view of that the insurance company, who is the insurer of the auto in question is not liable, however the learned Tribunal has directed the insurance company to pay the awarded amount. He further submits that in a case of head on collision both the vehicles are liable for the compensation to be paid. According to him, charge sheet was submitted against the driver of the Bolero as well as the Tempo driver. He submits that there is no clear-cut finding of the learned Tribunal with regard to the recovery of the amount from the owner of the Bolero, however, the Bolero in question was not insured as such this finding of recovery from the owner that too without clear cut finding is erroneous. He further submits that the driving license was also disputed and as such the award passed by learned Tribunal is vitiated and according to him this award required to be interfered with.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the claimants submits that the claimant has rightly claimed the compensation as both the vehicles were involved in the said accident. He submits that the right of the claimants cannot be snatched on the technical ground which has been argued by the learned counsel appearing for the insurance company. He submits that if the Bolero in question was not insured, the owner of the Bolero is also liable.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the Auto in question submits that the said Auto was insured with the present appellant and as such the owner of the Tempo is not liable and the learned Tribunal has rightly held so.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/owner of the Bolero submits that the insurance company namely H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. has not intimated about the cancellation of the insurance pursuant to the dishonor of the cheque and in view of that t