Back
2018 Supreme(P&H) 4473
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Lisa Gill, J.
New India Assurance Company Limited - Appellant
Versus
Smt. Sunita - Respondent
FAO No. 2036, 2040, 2041 of 2018 (O&M) and Civil Revision No. 2785 of 2018 (O&M)
Decided On : 13-08-2018
Mr. Deepak Suri, Advocate, for the Appellant; None, for the Respondent
Liability for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, Section 166 and the successful proof of the case by the claimants based on preponderance of probabilities.
Headnote:
Motor Accident - Rash and Negligent Driving - Motor Vehicles Act, Section 166 - Compensation, Insurance Policy Violation - [MOTOR VEHICULAR ACCIDENT, RASH AND NEGLIGENT DRIVING, MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, SECTION 166] - The court discussed the issues related to the motor vehicular accident, compensation for injuries and death, and violation of insurance policy terms. The key legal provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, Section 166 were interpreted to establish liability for compensation and the violation of insurance policy terms. The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of the evidence and the successful proof of the case by the claimants.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a motor vehicular accident caused by rash and negligent driving, resulting in injuries and death. The claimants sought compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle, and the claimants successfully proved their case based on preponderance of probabilities.
Issues: The issues included determining the cause of the accident, the amount of compensation for injuries and death, and the violation of insurance policy terms.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the accident was caused by rash and negligent driving, and the compensation awarded by the tribunal was justified with no grounds for reduction.
Final Decision: The appeals and revision petition filed by the insurance company were dismissed with no order as to costs.
JUDGMENT
Lisa Gill , J. - Present appeals have been filed by The New India Assurance Company Limited challenging award dated 27.09.2017 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jhajjar (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal'). Learned Tribunal vide consolidated award dated 27.09.2017 has decided four claim petitions arising out of the same accident.
2. Brief facts which are common to all the cases are that Devender (since deceased) alongwith his family members Sunita - his wife, Kavita wife of Jatin, Parshant son of Jaideep, Kamlesh wife of Ram Parshad, Sunita wife of Jaideep were proceeding to Kurukshetra in a three wheeler, which was driven by Jaideep son of Dharambir. When they reached near Kambopura, District Karnal on G.T. Road, a truck/trala bearing registration No. HR-69B-8997 came to the G.T. Road from a side driven by respondent -Anil in a rash and negligent manner, hit the three wheeler being driven by Jaideep. Due to this impact, they fell on the road and received multiple injuries. They were taken to the Trauma Centre, General Hospital, Karnal. Devender succumbed to his injuries. All the other occupants sustained serious injuries.
3. Respondents Nos. 1 to 3 (in FAO No. 2036 of 2018) filed MACT Petition No. 78 of 2017 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation on account of death of Devender on 14.11.2016 in a motor vehicle accident caused due to driving of the offending vehicle bearing registration No. HR-69B-8997 by respondent - Anil in a rash and negligent manner.
4. Respondent - Kavita in FAO No. 2040 of 2018 filed MACT Petition No. 79 of 2017 sought compensation on account of injuries suffered by her in the motor vehicle accident.
5. Respondent - Parshant in CR No. 2758 of 2018 filed MACT Petition No. 80 of 2017 sought compensation on account of injuries suffered by him in the motor vehicle accident.
6. Respondent - Jaideep in FAO No. 2041 of 2018 filed MACT Petition No. 81 of 2017 claimed compenstion on account of injuries suffered by him in the motor vehicle accident.
7. Claim was resisted by the respondents. Following issues were framed in claim petition Nos. 78 to 81 of 2017 arising out of the common award by the learned Tribunal:-
1. Whether Kavita, Parshant and Jai Deep (injured) and Devender (deceased) met with motor vehicular accident on14.11.2016 due to rash and negligent driving of Truck bearing registration No. HR-69B-8997, driven by respondent No. 1 ? OPP
2. If issue No. 1 is proved in favour of the petitioner Kavita (injured), to what amount of compensation petitioner is entitled to and from whom? OPP.
3. If issue No. 1 is proved in favour of the petitioner Parshant (injured), to what amount of compensation petitioner is entitled to and from whom? OPP.
4. If issue No. 1 is proved in favour of the petitioner Jai Deep (injured), to what amount of compensation petitioner is entitled to and from whom? OPP.
5. If issue No. 1 is proved in favour of the petitioners Sunita and others, to what amount of compensation petitioners are entitled to and from whom? OPP.
6. Whether respondent No. 1 Anil was not holding valid and effective driving license? OPR-3
7. Whether respondents No. 1 and 2 have violated term and condition of insurance policy, if so, to what effect? OPR-3
8. Relief.
8. Learned Tribunal held that the accident in question took place due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by respondent - Anil.
9. Compensation to the claimants/legal heirs of Devender afforded by the learned Tribunal is as under:-
| S. No. | Heads | Calculations |
| (i) | Net Income | Rs. 3,64,200/- per annum (Rs. 30,350 x 12) |
| (ii) | %rd of (i) deducted as personal expenses of the deceased | Rs. (3,64,200-1,21,400)/- = 2,42,800/- |
| (iii) | Compensation after multiplier of 11 is applied | Rs. (2,42,800/- x 11) = Rs. 26,70,800 |
| (iv) | Loss of consortium (to petit | |
