Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 6067
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 27th OF MAY, 2024
MISC. APPEAL No. 1927 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
1.
GOVINDI
KUSHW
AHA
S/O
GY
A
PRASAD
KUSHW
AHA,
AGED
ABOUT
48
YEARS,
OCCUPATION:
DRIVER
R/O
VILLAGE
LKHURAPURV
A,
P.S.RAJNAGAR,
TAHSIL
RAJNAGAR, DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (MADHY
A
PRADESH)
2.
SATRAM DWIVEDI W/O SHRI RAMMANOHAR
DWIVEDI R/O VILLAGE BACHHAUN, TAHSIL
LA
VKUSHNAGAR, DISTRICT (MADHY
A PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI SOURABH SINGH THAKUR - ADVOCATE)
AND
1.
SMT. RANU SONI W/O LATE SHRICHAND SONI,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE CHANDLA,
AT
REPRESENT
R/O
BEHIND
AGRA
W
AL
DHARMSHALA
PIPARSANIY
A
MOHALLA,
CHHATARPUR,
P.S.CITY
KOTW
ALI,
TAHSIL
CHHATARPUR
DISTRICT
CHHATARPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2.
ASHISH SONI S/O LATE SHRICHAND SONI, AGED
ABOUT
4
YEARS, OCCUPATION:
MINOR
THROUGH ITS NATURAN GUARDIAN MOTHER
SMT. RANU SONI R/O VILLAGE CHANDLA, AT
REPRESENT
R/O
BEHIND
AGRA
W
AL
DHARMSHALA
PIPARASANIY
A
MOHALLA,
CHHATARPUR
P.S.CITY
KOTW
ALI,
TAHSIL
CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
3.
ANAND SONI S/O LATE SHRICHAND SONI, AGED
ABOUT
2
YEARS, OCCUPATION:
MINOR
THROUGH ITS NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER
SMT. RANU SONI R/O VILLAGE CHANDLA, AT
REPRESENT
R/O
BEHIND
AGRA
W
AL
DHARMSHALA
PIPARSANIY
A
MOHALLA,
CHHATARPUR,
P.S.CITY
KOTW
ALI,
TAHSIL
CHHATARPUR
DISTRICT
CHHATARPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4.
RAMA SONI S/O LATE SHRICHAND SONI, AGED
ABOUT
2
YEARS, OCCUPATION:
MINOR
THROUGH ITS NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER
SMT. RANU SONI R/O VILLAGE CHANDLA, AT
REPRESENT
R/O
BEHIND
AGRA
W
AL
DHARMSHALA
PIPARSANIY
A
MOHALLA,
CHHATARPUR,
P.S.CITY
KOTW
ALI,
TAHSIL
CHHATARPUR
DISTRICT
CHHATARPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5.
RAMA
V
ATAR SONI S/O SHRI VRINDA
W
AN SONI
R/O VILLAGE CHANDLA, AT REPRESENT R/O
BEHIND AGRA
W
AL DHARMSHALA PIPARSANIY
A
MOHALLA, CHHATARPUR, P.S.CITY
KOTW
ALI,
TAHSIL CHHATARPUR DISTRICT CHHATARPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
6.
BRANCH MANAGER THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE
COMPANY LTD BRANCH OFFICE JAWAHAR ROAD
CHHATARPUR,
TAHSIL
AND
DISTRICT
CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI RAKESH KUMAR JAIN - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.6)
MISC. APPEAL No. 1925 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
1.
GOVINDI
KUSHW
AHA
S/O
GY
A
PRASAD
KUSHW
AHA OCCUPATION: DRIVER R/O VILLAGE
LAKHURAPURW
A
P.S.
RAJNAGAR
TEHSIL-
RAJNAGAR
DIST-
CHHATTARPUR
(MADHY
A
PRADESH)
2.
SATRAM DWIVEDI W/O SHRI RAMMANOHAR
DWIVEDI OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O VILLAGE
BACHHAUN TAHSIL LA
VKUSHNAGAR DISTRICT
CHHATARPUR M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI SOURABH SINGH THAKUR - ADVOCATE)
AND
1.
SMT. CHHAMA SONI W/O LATE PANKAJ SONI,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE CHANDLA,
AT
REPRESENT
R/O
BEHIND
AGRA
W
AL
DHARMSHALA
PIPARSANIY
A
MOHALLA,
CHHATARPUR,
P.S.CITY
KOTW
ALI,
TAHSIL
CHHATARPUR
DISTRICT
CHHATARPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2.
AKASH SONI S/O LATE PANKAJ SONI, AGED
ABOUT 1 YEARS, OCCUPATION: REPRESENTED
THROUGH ITS NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER
SMT. CHAMA SONI AGED 22 YEAR W/O PANKAJ
SONI R/O VILLAGE CHANDLA AT PRESENT R/O
BEHIND AGRA
W
AL DHARMSHALA PIPARSANIY
A
MOHALLA CHHATARPUR P.S. CITY
KOTW
ALI
TAHSIL CHHATARPUR DISTRICT CHHATARPUR
M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
3.
SMT. VIDY
A SONI W/O HARISHANKER SONI,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE CHANDLA
AT
PRESENT
R/O
BEHIND
AGRA
W
AL
DHARMSHALA
PIPARSANIY
A
MOHALLA
CHHATARPUR
P.S.
CITY
KOTW
ALI
TAHSIL
CHHATARPUR
DISTRICT
CHHATARPUR
M.P.
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4.
HARISHANKER SONI S/O SHRI JAGADEV SONI,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE CHANDLA
AT
PRESENT
R/O
BEHIND
AGRA
W
AL
DHARMSHALA
PIPARSANIY
A
MOHALLA
CHHATARPUR
P.S.
CITY
KOTW
ALI
TAHSIL
CHHATARPUR
DISTRICT
CHHATARPUR
M.P.
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5.
SUNIL SONI S/O HARISHANKER SONI, AGED
ABOUT 15 YEARS, OCCUPATION: REPRESENTED
THROUGH
ITS
NATURAL
GUARDIAN
HARISHANKER SONI S/O SHIR JAGADEV SONI
R/O VILLAGE CHANDLA AT PRESENT R/O BEHIND
AGRA
W
AL
DHARMSHALA
PIPARSANIY
A
MOHALLA CHHATARPUR P.S. CITY
KOTW
ALI
TAHSIL CHHATARPUR DISTRICT CHHATARPUR
M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
6.
BRANCH MANAGER THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE
COMPANY
LTD. BRANCH OFFICE JA
W
AHAR
ROAD CHHATARPUR TAHSIL AND DISTRICT
CHHATARPUR M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI RAKESH KUMAR JAIN - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.6
AND SHRI DINESH PATEL - DY. G.A. APPEARING ON BEHALF OF
ADVOCATE GENERAL)
These appeals coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
Madan Singh,Advocate General
ORDER
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, heard finally at motion stage.
2. This common order shall govern disposal of Misc. Appeal No.1925 of 2022 of 2020 (Govind Kushwaha and Others Vs. Smt.Chhama Soni and Others) and Misc. Appeal No.1927 of 2022 (Govind Kushwaha and Others Vs. Smt.Renu Soni and Others) arising out of common award dated 03.02.2022 relating to MACC No.164/2018 and 165/2018.
3. Both these appeals have been filed by on behalf of Owner and driver of offending vehicle seeking modification of impugned award, so far as it relates to liability to pay compensation whereby Insurance Company has been exonerated from liability to pay the compensation.
4. Learned counsel on behalf of owner/driver of offending vehicle, after referring to para 9 and 10 of non-applicant No.3’s witness Anurag Kumar and terms and conditions of insurance policy, submit that in insurance policy there is no condition with respect to fitness of vehicle. Further, it is also urged that incident occurred on 03.05.2018 and there was fitness certificate from 5.6.2018 to 4.6.2019 and prior to accident there was also fitness certificate for the period 3.2.2017 to 2.2.2018. Therefore, it will be presumed that on the date of accident, offending vehicle was fit for being plied on the road. On above grounds, it is urged that tribunal has erred in exonerating insurance company from liability to pay compensation. With respect to above submission, learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon Union India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Vishakantegowda and Others , 2020 SCC Online Kar 2960 . On above grounds, it is urged that appeals filed by the appellants be allowed and Insurance company be also made liable to pay the compensation jointly and severely.
5. Learned counsel for respondent/Insurance company after referring to Sections 39 and 56 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 as well as relying on MA No.1432 of 2016 (The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt.Asha and Others) dated 27.06.2023, submit that as there was no valid fitness certificate on the date of accident, therefore, offending vehicle would not be deemed to be registered on the date of accident. On above grounds, it is also urged that tribunal has rightly exonerated insurance company from liability to pay the compensation. On above grounds, it is urged that appeals filed by the appellants be dismissed.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
7. It is correct that in the instant case, accident occurred on 03.5.2018. From Ex.D/4, D/5, D/6 and D/7, it is evident that there was fitness certificate for the period from 5.6.2018 to 4.6.2019. Learned counsel for the appellants has also submitted that there was valid fitness for a period from 3.2.2017 to 2.2.2018. It also urged that in view of above, it would be presumed that on the date of accident, offending vehicle was fit for being plied on the road. It is correct that in insurance policy Ex.NA/2 condition with respect to valid fitness is not specifically mentioned.
8. Therefore, question arises as to whether absence of valid fitness on the date of accident constitute breach of terms and conditions of insurance policy. Coordinate Bench of this Court in United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Vinod and Others, (2020) 1 MPLJ 142 , has dealt with above issue in details which is as under : <br/>
- "5. Section 39 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for registration of the vehicle and section 56 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for fitness certificate.
6. Sections 39 and 56 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 reads as under:
39. Necessity for registration.— No person shall drive any motor vehicle and no owner of a motor vehicle shall cause or permit the vehicle to be driven in any public place or in any other place unless the vehicle is registered in accordance with this Chapter and the certificate of registration of the vehicle has not been suspended or cancelled and the vehicle
