JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)

Heard Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Ms. S.A.

Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the applicant/respondent no.1.

2. The instant appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is preferred against the judgment and award dated 08.07.2011 passed by the learned Member, MACT, Lakhimpur in MAC Case No.25/2009, whereby an amount of Rs.3,86,000/- was adjudged as compensation to the claimant to be paid within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of award, failing which interest @ 6% p.a. would accrue to the awarded amount. The facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of the instant appeal are that the son of the claimant Aditya Sarma (since deceased) while travelling on his own vehicle bearing Registration No.AS-07-B-5237 on 12.03.2008 at about 3:30 p.m. fell down from the vehicle on account of rash and negligent driving of the said vehicle of the driver, as a result of which the son of the claimant sustained serious injuries and subsequently he succumbed to his injuries and died. Subsequent thereto a claim petition was filed whereby the claimant who is the mother of the deceased sought for compensation to the tune of Rs.19,15,500/-. The said claim proceedings was registered and numbered as MACT Case No.25/2009. The appellant who was the opposite party no.2 in the said proceedings filed their written statement and pursuant thereto 3 (three) Issues were framed i.e. (1) Whether the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle registration No.AS.07.B-5237 (Tracker) by its driver causing death of Aditya Sarma; (2) Whether the claimant is entitled to get any compensation as prayed for and (3) What other relief/reliefs the parties are entitled to.

3. The claimant in support of her case examined herself and 2 (two) other witnesses. The appellant who is the opposite party no.2 adduced evidence of one Sri D.C. Barman, Administrative Officer of the appellant company stationed at Lakhimpur and as well as insurance policy exhibited as Exhibit-A. The Claims Tribunal while deciding the Issue No.1 came to a finding that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by the driver which led to the death of the claimant’s son. While deciding the Issue No.2 and 3 which were done together, the Court below was of the opinion that both the opposite party nos.1 and 2 i.e. the driver and the appellant were jointly and severally liable to make payment of the amount that may be found due to the claimant. In arriving at the compensation, the Court below found that Rs.3,86,000 would be just and fair compensation to be paid to the claimant within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of the award, failing which interest @ 6% p.a. shall accrue on the awarded amount.

4. Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the learned Tribunal below had erred in granting in compensation to the claimant in view of the Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act. He submits that in similar circumstances i.e. in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Prabha Devi and Others reported in (2013) 14 SCC 719 as well as Dhanraj vs. New India Assurance Company Limited and Another reported in (2004) 8 SCC 553, it was clearly held that the liability of the insurance policy is only for the purpose of indemnifying the insured against the liabilities incurred towards a third party or in respect of the damages to the property. It was further submitted that since the deceased himself was the insurer as well as the owner of the vehicle, no amount of compensation could have been awarded to the claimant inasmuch as, a perusal of the Exhibit-A would only show that the premium was paid only in respect to OD-Basic as well as for Third Party Basic and consequently the claimant’s son who is the owner did not get himself insured. He further submitted that the insurance premium paid of Rs.5649.07 under the heading OD-Basic was onl