AFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Judgment reserved on 26/06/2024 Judgment passed on 16 /07/2024 MAC No. 278 of 2016

1. Smt. Sukali Bai (Since Died) W/o Shri Banwar Lal Dhruv (Wrongly Mentioned As Banwari) Aged About 45 Years, (Owner of the Vehicle) Through Legal Heirs:-

(A) - Banwar Lal Dhruv S/o Beldar Dhruv, Aged About 49 Years R/o Nichepara Bhankheda Tahsil Bhanupratappur District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

(B) - Basant Kumar Dhruv S/o Banwar Lal Dhruv, Aged About 25 Years R/o Nichepara Bhankheda Tahsil Bhanupratappur District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

(C) - Miss Mamta Dhruv D/o Banwar Lal Dhruv, Aged About 23 Years R/o Nichepara Bhankheda Tahsil Bhanupratappur District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

(D) - Vivek Kumar Dhruv S/o Banwar Lal Dhruv, Aged About 17 Years Minor Through Shri Banwar Lal Dhruv Natural Guardian (Father) R/o Nichepara Bhankheda Tahsil Bhanupratappur District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

---- Appellants Versus

1. Smt. Satyeshwari Komare Wd/o Late Mukesh Komare, Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Bhanbheda P.S. And Tahsil Bhanupratappur District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

2. Shyamlal Komare S/o Late Dharamuram, Aged About 56 Years R/o Village Bhanbheda P.S. And Tahsil Bhanupratappur District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

3. Smt. Hironda Bai Komare W/o Shyamlal Komare, Aged About 49 Years R/o Village Bhanbheda P.S. And Tahsil Bhanupratappur District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. P.K. Tulsyan, Advocate.

For Respondents : Mr. D.N. Prajapati, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J.

C .A.V. Judgment

1. This appeal filed by the appellant(s) under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award dated 07.08.2015 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhanupratappur, District-North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh in Claim Case No. 18/2014 (“Smt. Satyeshwari Komre & Ors. vs. Smt. Sukali Bai”) (hereinafter referred to as “award in question”) whereby a compensation amount of Rs. 2,46,000/- has been awarded against the appellant(s) and in favour of respondents 1 to 3.

2. Brief facts of the case were that on 07.04.2013 at about

12.00 noon, deceased Mukesh Komre and his conductor were returning in vehicle commander jeep bearing registration No. CG-19-T-0468 (offending vehicle) after dropping the labourers of the forest department at village Manghaur Parali. Then near Eric Buta Road Nala, the offending vehicle lost control and overturned, due to which driver Mukesh Komre got crushed under it and died due to grievous injuries. In Pakhanjoor police station, Merg No. 23/2013 and FIR No. 41/2013 were registered. However, due to the death of the driver, no charge sheet was filed.

3. The legal heirs of deceased Mukesh Kumar, respondents No. 1 to 3, filed a claim for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. On which, the Tribunal, after a proper hearing and taking evidence from both parties, passed the award in question holding that the vehicle lost control due to the failure of the brakes of the offending vehicle and the driver Mukesh died due to being crushed under it. It was the vehicle owner's responsibility to take care of the vehicle from time to time. Due to the negligence, the accident occurred due to the failure of brakes and Mukesh died. The offending vehicle was not insured. Therefore, an award was passed in favour of the legal heirs of Mukesh and against the owner of the offending vehicle, appellant Mrs. Sukali Bai. Which has been challenged in this appeal by the legal heirs of appellant Sukali Bai as a result of her death.

4. Learned counsel for the legal heirs of the registered owner of the offending vehicle argues that the claimants had submitted the claim application before the Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for which negligence or rashness was required to be proved. The vehicle owner cannot be held responsible in case of an accident caused by the neg