Branch Manager, Reliance General Insurance Company Limited vs Sudha Devi And Ors

Reliance General Insurance Company Limited has preferred this appeal against the award dated 08.05.2019 passed in Motor Accident Claim Case

No.8/2016 passed by learned Principal District Judge-cum-Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Koderma.

Learned counsel for the appellant Mrs. Swati Shalini has submitted that two vehicles one bearing registration no. JH-12A-9054, driven by the

deceased Surendra Kumar Singh was coming from Ramgarh and as he reached at Hemantpur Petrol Pump, NH-23, a truck bearing registration no.

JH-09K-0226 coming from opposite direction i.e. the Petarwar being driven very rashly and negligently at a high speed by its driver collided with each

other due to which Surendra Kumar Singh, driver of the truck bearing registration no.JH12A 9054 succumbed to the injuries and died on the spot.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that Tribunal has decided issue no.5 with regard to the extent deceased was negligent and held at

para-14 of the award that “ the principle of res ipsa loquitur is applicable in this case and it may safely be concluded that accident took place due to

rash and negligent driving of the driver of both the vehicles. The deceased has contributed his own negligence to the extent of 50%.â€​

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that such finding was recorded by the learned Tribunal but the Tribunal has awarded a compensation

to the tune of Rs.20,86,000/- with interest @9% per annum from the date of institution of the case i.e. 20.06.2016. Learned counsel for the appellant

has further submitted that both the Insurance Company i.e. the appellant Reliance General Insurance Company Limited and National Insurance

Company Limited have been saddled with 50% liability each. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the Tribunal has not taken notice of

the insurance policy, where owner-cum-driver was covered with Rs.2,00,000/- only. Mrs. Shalini has further submitted that the appellant Insurance

Company has been saddled with Rs.10,43,000/- with interest @9% which is contrary to the judgment passed by Apex Court in the case of Dharmpal

and Sons vs. UP State Road Transport Corporation; 2008 (4) JCR 79 SC. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that such amount of

Rs. 2,00,000/- has already been paid vide Exhibits-B to E to the claimants. This Court puts a query to the learned counsel:

(i) Why driver of the vehicle, which was insured before the Reliance General Insurance Company Limited be not treated as third party for

another vehicle for compensation under section 166 of the M.V. Act?

(ii) Whether apart from third party, the deceased is also entitled for Rs.2,00,000/- as additional compensation because of the coverage of

the insurance policy by the own Insurance Company, where his vehicle was insured?

(iii) Whether the contributory negligence is to be deducted from total amount?

This court is not agreeing with the finding recorded by the learned Tribunal in para-14 that normally in a situation the accident is as a result of equal

negligence of both the drivers of oncoming vehicle unless and until a specific material is brought on record for such finding.

Under the aforesaid circumstances, let notices be issued upon respondent no. 1 to 4 under both process i.e. registered cover with A/D as well as

under ordinary process for which requisites etc. must be filed within two weeks.

Let two copies of memo of appeal along with impugned award be served upon Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate who normally appears for National

Insurance Company Limited so as to have effective service of notice.

Office is directed to verify whether National Insurance Company Limited has preferred any appeal before this Court against the impugned award

or not.

Put up this case after receipt of service of notice.

In the meantime, appellant shall deposit the entire balance amount along with interest before the learned Tribunal within a period of 60 days from

today. The Tribunal shall not disburse the amount without leave of this Court.