Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 1001 (ALL)

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. v. INDER DEO OJHA

2001-11-05

SUDHIR NARAIN, V.M.SAHAI

body2001
NARAIN, SAHAI, JJ. ( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the award dated 7. 9. 2001 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gorakhpur (in short the Tribunal)awarding Rs. 1,50,000 as compensation to the claimants-respondents. ( 2 ) THE claim petition was filed by the claimants-respondents with the allegations that Raj Kumar, son of respondent Nos. 1 and 2, aged about 14 years, while he was going on bicycle on 18. 9. 1992 at about 10. 30 a. m. from his village Ujhawali to surdaha, when he reached near kutchhi patri of Gola Barhalganj, then from north, a tractor No. UHW 4634 dashed against him with the result he received serious injuries and died on the spot. ( 3 ) THE appellant contested the claim petition on various grounds. It was denied that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver and it was further urged that on the date of accident the vehicle in question was not insured. ( 4 ) THE Tribunal recorded a finding that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver in question. The vehicle in question was insured with the appellant company and after taking into consideration of the material evidence on record, came to the conclusion that claimants-respondents were entitled for compensation of Rs. 1,50,000. This order of the Tribunal has been challenged in the present appeal. ( 5 ) WE have heard Mr. Shishir Kumar, the learned counsel for the appellant and mr. Piyush Mishra, learned counsel for claimants-respondents. ( 6 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellant has submitted that the accident took place on 18. 9. 1992 at about 8. 30 a. m. while the cover note was issued on 19. 9. 1992 and on the date and time of accident the vehicle in question should not be. treated as insured. The Tribunal has considered this aspect of the matter. It was found that the agent of the appellant had accepted the premium at 10 a. m. on 18. 9. 1992 for insuring the vehicle in question and accepted the proposal of the owner of the vehicle. Once the proposal was accepted and on that basis a cover note was issued, the appellant shall be liable to pay the compensation. We do not find any legal infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal. 9. 1992 for insuring the vehicle in question and accepted the proposal of the owner of the vehicle. Once the proposal was accepted and on that basis a cover note was issued, the appellant shall be liable to pay the compensation. We do not find any legal infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal. ( 7 ) AS regards the quantum of compensation it has been found that the son of the claimants had died and taking into consideration various aspects, compensation of Rs. 1,50,000 has been awarded. This amount is not excessive. ( 8 ) THE appeal is accordingly dismissed. ( 9 ) RS. 25,000 deposited by the appellant in this court, shall be remitted by Registry of this court to Motor Accidents Claims tribunal concerned within one month for the payment/adjustment of the amount payable by the appellant to the claimants-respondents. Appeal dismissed. .