Back
2024 Supreme(Jhk) 422
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
Reliance General Insurance Company Limited - Appellant
Versus
Rinki Kumari, W/o. Late Pankaj Kumar & Ors. - Respondents
M.A. No. 48 of 2019
Decided On : 23-02-2024
For the Appellant : Mrs. Swati Shalini.
For the Respondent: Mr. Arvind Kr. Chaudhary.
IMPORTANT POINT
The insurance company is liable for compensation as the deceased was not at fault in the accident, and the Tribunal's calculations of compensation were justified under the Motor Vehicle Act.
Headnote:
(A) Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 - Sections 140 and 166 - Compensation for death in road accident - Claimants awarded Rs.35,47,712/- by Tribunal - Insurance company contested liability citing lack of valid driving license for deceased - Tribunal found no merit in appeal, confirming award and directing payment with interest. (Paras 9, 18, 19)
(B) Negligence - Determination of liability - Court held that deceased was not at fault as he was struck from behind by the offending vehicle, and the insurance company failed to prove any violation of policy terms. (Paras 14, 15, 16)
Facts of the case:
The appeal arises from a claim for compensation following the death of Pankaj Kumar Mandal in a road accident caused by a truck. The claimants sought compensation based on the deceased's income and loss of dependency.
Findings of Court:
The Tribunal correctly calculated the compensation based on the deceased's income and applicable multiplier, dismissing the insurance company's claims of contributory negligence and policy violations.
Issues: The main issues included the determination of liability, the validity of the deceased's driving license, and the calculation of compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the insurance company was liable as the deceased was not at fault in the accident, and the Tribunal's calculations were justified under the Motor Vehicle Act.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. This miscellaneous appeal has been preferred by the named appellant-Reliance General Insurance Company Limited for setting aside the judgment/award dated 12.10.2018 passed by learned District Judge-IV-cum-MACT Judge, Deoghar in Motor Accident Claim Case No.14 of 2014, whereby and whereunder the claim case filed by respondent Nos.1 and 2 under section 140 and 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 was allowed and the appellant has been directed to pay compensation amount of Rs.35,47,712/-.
3. The facts giving rise to this appeal in narrow campus is that on 03.02.2014 at about 5:30 PM, one Pankaj Kumar Mandal @ Guddu was going to Deoghar from his village Pelwa by his own motorcycle and when reached near Saint Francis School, Jasidih main road then, he was dashed from behind by a truck bearing Reg. No.JH-17F-6811 which was being driven rashly and negligently by its driver, resulting the said Pankaj Kumar Mandal sustaining grievous injuries and was taken to hospital by passersby but was declared dead.
4. As regards upon the accident, Jasidih P.S. Case No.34 of 2014 was registered on the basis of fardbayan of one Balkrishna Modi against the driver of the offending truck bearing Reg. No.JH-17F-6811 under sections 279, 304(A) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. It is further alleged that the deceased whose age about 29 years was a permanent employee of Union Bank of India and his salary was of Rs.18,267/-per month left behind his widow Rinky Kumari and mother Gayatri Devi who was applicants in this case, as such, total Rs.34,40,500/-has been claimed along with interest @ 12% per annum by the applicants from the date of occurrence/accident till the date of actual payment.
5. Upon service of notice, the owner of the offending vehicle bearing Reg. No.JH-17F-6811 appeared and filed his written statement with usual plea that the vehicle was insured with Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, which is liable to satisfy the compensation amount as per the terms and conditions of the policy which was valid from 25.09.2013 to 24.09.2014.
6. Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, the appellant appeared and filed detailed written statement stating inter alia that the offending vehicle was registered with this company but disputed the factum of the accident as pleaded by claimants. It was further pleaded that the deceased was driving his motorcycle at the time of accident in violation of provisions under section 39 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 as he had no valid and effective driving license to drive two wheelers, hence, the amount of compensation as claimed is exorbitant and excessive. It was further pleaded that the driver of the offending truck bearing Reg. No.JH-17F-6811 was not having valid and effective driving license at the time of accident, hence, the insurance company is not liable to pay any compensation towards the death of the deceased.
7. On the basis of pleadings of the parties following issues were settled for adjudication by learned Tribunal:-
(i) Whether the suit has been framed is maintainable?
(ii) Whether there is any cause of action for filing the present claim case?
(iii) Whether the death of deceased Pankaj Kumar Mandal occurred in road traffic accident caused by truck bearing Reg. No.JH-17F-6811 due to rash and negligent driving by its driver?
(iv) Whether the driver of truck bearing Reg. No.JH-17F-6811 was driving the same with valid and effective driving license?
(v) Whether truck bearing Reg. No.JH-17F-6811 was insured at the time of the accident?
(vi) Whether the claimants are entitled to get any compensation? If so what will be the quantum of compensation?
(vii) Whether the claimants are liable to get any other relief or reliefs?
8. In order to substantiate their claims, the claimants have examined three witnesses namely P.W.1 Rinky Kumari (wife of the deceased), P.W. 2 Umesh Kumar Agrawal and P.W. 3 Gayatri Devi( mother of the deceased).
Apart from
