Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J
Asha Devi, W/o Late Naresh Choudhary – Appellant
Versus
Rajesh Mandal, S/o Amulya Mandal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Heard, learned counsel for the parties.
1. The claimants have preferred M.A. No.466 of 2015 for enhancement of compensation against the Award dated 27th March, 2015 passed in Title (M.V.) Suit No.262 of 2013 under Section 166 of the M.V. Act for death of one Naresh Choudhary@ Naresh Pasi in a motor vehicle accident, whereas C.O. No.43 of 2021 has been preferred by the appellant-owner of the offending vehicle against the liability fixed on the owner to pay the compensation amount.
2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the claimants/ appellants that the judgment/ Award passed by the learned Tribunal is not in accordance with the ratio laid down by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi , reported in (2017) 16 SCC 686 as loss of income under the head of Future Prospect has not been considered and further under the conventional head, only Rs.9,500/- has been awarded.
3. It is further argued that the deceased was working as Cook and in the claim application, income of the deceased as Rs.4,500/- per month was made, but the Award has been computed on the basis of monthly income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/-.
C
The court clarified that oral evidence can prevail over FIR statements in determining liability and compensation in motor vehicle accident claims.
Point of law : Insurance Company, shall deposit the compensation amount as awarded, at the first instance and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle, without filing a separate suit.
Insurance policies covering commercial vehicles include risks for coolies engaged in loading and unloading, regardless of claims of unauthorized travel.
The court affirmed that the insurance company is liable for compensation when the driver, even if related to the owner, was covered under the policy, emphasizing the principle of just compensation.
Insurance companies cannot evade liability for compensation due to policy breaches if the vehicle was not used for hire and the driver was licensed.
The court established that a claimant returning in a goods vehicle after unloading goods is considered an authorized representative, thus entitled to compensation under Section 147 of the Motor Vehic....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of liability to pay compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, emphasizing the need for the Insurance Company to prove the violat....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the liability of the Insurance Company to pay just compensation to the claimants under the Motor Vehicle Act.
The court ruled that reasonable claims regarding income should be accepted without strict documentary evidence, and the Insurance Company is liable to indemnify the owner despite policy conditions pr....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
