Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd vs Sumitra Devi And Others

Sudhanshu Dhulia, J

This is an appeal filed by the insurance company under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, against the award dated 27.10.2016 passed the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dehradun in M.A.C.P. No. 77 of 2013.

Brief facts of the case are that on 27.06.2012 at about 08:15 P.M., when the deceased Prakash was crossing the road at a placed called Shyampur in Rishikesh, he was hit by a car bearing registration no. DL-9CB-6092 which was being driven rashly and negligently by its driver. Consequently, Prakash sustained grievous injuries. He was taken to Government Hospital, Rishikesh and thereafter he was referred to higher centre and ultimately he passed away on 07.07.2012 due to injuries sustained by him in the accident which occurred on 27.06.2012.

The parents and the brother of deceased had moved a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1966, in which subsequently the minor daughter of deceased Prakash was also arrayed as one of the claimants. It was submitted in the claim petition that the deceased was aged 23 year. He was working as an agent for supplying pickles and was having a monthly income of Rs. 8,000/- (Rupees Eight Thousand only). A compensation of Rs. 24,45,000/- (Rupees Twenty Four Lakh Forty Five Thousand only) was claimed by the claimants.

On the basis of the pleadings made by the rival parties, the learned motor accident claims tribunal framed the following issues:

"1. Whether on 27.06.2012 at 08:15 PM near Uniyal Provision Store, Shyampur, Rishikesh, the driver of car having vehicle registration no. DL-09CAB-6092 hit deceased Prakash by driving it rashly and negligently, as a result of which deceased Prakash sustained grievous injuries on his head, chest and various parts of the body and due to the said injuries, he passed away during treatment?

Whether at the time of accident, the driver of car vehicle No. DL-0CAB-6092 was having valid and effective driving licence?

Whether at the time of accident, the car vehicle no. DL-09CAB-6092 was being plied without any valid registration, permit and fitness?

Whether the claimants are entitled for any compensation, if yes then from which of the parties?"

As far as issue no. 1 is concerned, the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal came to the conclusion that the death of deceased Prakash had caused due to injuries sustained by him in the accident occurred on 27.06.2012, when he was hit by the car bearing registration no. DL-9C AB-6092, which was being driven by its driver rashly and negligently.

While deciding issue nos. 2 & 3, the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal came to the conclusion that the vehicle in question was validly registered and insured. Since the fitness certificate, driving licence and permit were not produced on record by the driver/owner of the vehicle, the learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that the vehicle in question was being driven without any valid driving licence and fitness certificate.

While calculating the amount of compensation, however, the learned Tribunal recorded the finding that the deceased was 25 year of age at the time of his death and determined his monthly income as Rs. 4,500/-(Rupees Four Thousand Five Hundred only) which comes to Rs. 54,000/- (Rupees Fifty Four Thousand only) per annum. Thereafter, the learned tribunal deducted one-fourth of the amount from the annual income of the deceased towards personal expenses, and fixed the annual dependency income as Rs. 40,500/- (Rs. Forty Thousand Five Hundred only). Thereafter applying the multiplier of 18, the amount of compensation was calculated as Rs. 7,29,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Twenty Nine Thousand only). Apart from this, the learned Tribunal also awarded an amount of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) towards funeral expenses, Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) towards loss of love and affection to the parents and Rs. 1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh only) towards loss of love and affection to the child. Thus, a total compensation of Rs. 9,54,000/-(Rupees Nine Lakh Fifty Four Thousand only) has been awarded by the Tribunal. The learned Tribunal has fixed the responsibility on the insurance company to pay the amount of compensation, but has also given the liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle in question.

The learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Pramod Belwal has fairly submitted that the appellant is not challenging the quantum of compensation. The only prayer of the appellant is that instead of insurance company, the amount of compensation is liable to be paid by the owner of the vehicle.

Admittedly the award was ex parte against the owner. In this appeal also, the notice was served to the owner, but no one put appearance on behalf of the owner. The fact that the vehicle was insured with the appellant has not been denied. It is only fair that the liability to give the award is fixed on the insurance company or otherwise it would be an ineffective order. Therefore, this Court does not find any occasion to interfere in the award passed by the learned Tribunal. Appeal is therefore liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed.

The insurance company shall deposit the entire awarded amount before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dehradun along with the accrued interest within a period of three weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, which shall be given to the claimants after adjusting the amount already deposited by the appellant. The amount deposited by the insurance company, if any, before the Court, including the statutory amount of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) shall also be remitted to the concerned Tribunal forthwith by the Tribunal.