2024:CGHC:46555 AFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1278 of 2017

1 - Sushil Ratre S/o Shri Biselal Ratre Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Barbaspur Police Station Mahasanund District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh Driver And Owner Of Motor Cycle No. C G 04 / Cx 1118, Chhattisgarh ...Appellant versus

1 - Janak Singh Thakur S/o Shri Jagannath Singh Aged About 45 Years R/o Rajkumar College Campus. G. E. Road Raipur Chhattisgarh Claimant, Chhattisgarh

2 - I F F C O Tokio General Insurance Company Limited Through The Branch Manager, Laalganga Shopping Moll, Raipur Chhattisgarh. Insurer Of Motor Cycle No. 04/ CX 1118 ---- Respondents For appellant : Ms. Neelam Khan , Adv.

For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Amit Kumar Sahu, Adv.

For respondent : Mr. P.R. Patankar, Adv.

________________________________________________________

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma,

Order on Board

27.11.2024

1) The instant Appeal has been preferred by the Appellant, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, “the Act”), against the Award dated 13.07.2016 passed by 8^th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short, “the Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 176/2012, whereby the Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition and awarded sum of Rs. 5,40,500/- to the claimant holding valid learner license but there is breach of the terms and conditions of policy, therefore the liability to pay the amount of compensation has been fastened upon the Appellant and respondent No. 2 jointly and severally.

2) Facts leading to the filing of the instant Appeal are that on the date of incident i.e. on 09.10.2011, at about 11:40 pm, while the deceased Dhananjay Singh and appellant herein riding a motorcycle and deceased was pillion rider, the vehicle was being driver by appellant herein in a rash and negligent manner, in this process, the driver of the vehicle lost control over the vehicle and the vehicle dashed the divider, therefore the deceased sustained sever injuries and succumbed.

3) Learned counsel for appellant/claimant submits that the appellant herein had been holding valid learner license. The appellant herein is challenging the impugned award Annexure A-1 looking to the observation made in paragraphs -23 of the impugned award which is contrary to paragraph 34 of the impugned award. The execution proceeding has been initiated by respondent No. 2 .

4) Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that there is no breach of policy as reflects from Ex.D-1 that no such terms and conditions stipulated in the policy which had been violated and breached by the appellant herein, learned Tribunal had totally misread and mis-interpreted the contents of policy. Thus, learned counsel for the appellant prays for exoneration of liability of payment of compensation.

5) Learned counsel for respondent No. 1 supports the award and submits that the compensation has rightly been awarded and does not require any interference by this Court.

6) Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 submits that the liability of payment of compensation has already been decided by the claim Tribunal that as there is breach of policy the insurance company should first pay the compensation thereafter recover the same from the owner of the vehicle and as such the Insurance Company has already deposited the awarded amount with interest. The order of the learned Claims Tribunal does not require any interference.

7) Heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the record with utmost circumspection.

8) On perusal of record, it transpires the fact that on the date of accident, when the deceased Dhananjay Singh and appellant herein was riding a motorcycle and deceased was pillion rider, the vehicle was being driven by appellant herein in a rash and negligent manner, and in this process, the driver of the vehicle lost control over the vehicle and the vehicle dashed the divider, therefore the deceased sustained severe injuries and succumbed.

9) It is admit