Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 954 (JHR)

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Sanju Devi

2004-09-17

M.Y.EQBAL, VISHNUDEO NARAYAN

body2004
JUDGMENT M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. These two appeals at the instance of the appellant Oriental Insurance Company are directed against the judgment and award dated 31.8.2004 passed by 4th Additional Judicial Commissioner-cum-Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal in Compensation Case Nos. 7 of 1984 and 9 of 1984 awarding compensation to the tune of Rs- 1.50.000/- and Rs. 25.000/- for the death of father and son who were traveling in the trekker. 2. The claimants are the widow and sons of the deceased Satyendra Prasad Singh. The brief facts of the case is that on 12.10.1983 the claimant Smt. Sanju Devi was travelling with her husband and two sons in a trekker bearing registration No. BPN No. 8412 from Ranchi to Lohardaga. The trekker was over crowded and being driven rashly and negligently. It was alleged that when the trekker reached never village Kamre on Ranch! Lohardaga road. it collided with BSRTC Bus No. BHV-8224 belonging to Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, which was also being driven rashly and negligently. The accident resulted in mstant death of more than seven persons on the spot and complete damages to the vehicles. In the said accident the husband and one son of the claimant died on the spot. The deceased husband of the claimant was employed as Assistant in the Soil Conservation Office, Govt. of Bihar and posted at Lohardaga and he was getting salary of Rs. 1300/- per month. While the son of the claimant who died in the said accident, namely, Sachin was minor aged about 5 years. 4. The Claims Tribunal formulated the following issue for consideration : "In view of the pleadings of the parties the following issues were cast for deciding the claim petition : 1. Did the accident dated 12.10.1983 took place in the mariner as alleged ? 2. Were the deceased Satyendra Pd. Singh and master Sachin travelling in the ill-fated trekker No. BPN-8412? 3. Did their death took place in the manner as alleged? 4. Were the vehicles being driven rashly and negligently? 5. Are the O.Ps liable to pay the compensation to the claimants. If any, to what extent ? 4. While deciding issue Nos. 1 and 4, the Tribunal came to a definite finding that the accident look place due to rash and negligent driving of both the vehicles. On the issue of quantum of compensation, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. If any, to what extent ? 4. While deciding issue Nos. 1 and 4, the Tribunal came to a definite finding that the accident look place due to rash and negligent driving of both the vehicles. On the issue of quantum of compensation, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. L,50,000/-for the death of the husband of the claimant and a lump sum amount of Rs. 25,000/- was awarded few the death of the minor child Sachin. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants has assailed the impugned judgment and award mainly on the ground that the trekker being passenger carrying vehicle the liability in respect of the death or bodily injury of the passenger is restricted to Rs- 15.000/". Learned counsel submitted that the Tribunal committed serious error of law in holding that both the Insurer of the trekker and the owner of the bus are jointly and severely liable to pay the awarded amount. 6. It is really unfortunate that in case of death of a young person aged 35 years and his minor sons, although the Tribunal has awarded very low amount of compensation but instead of satisfying the award the appellant challenged the same in appeal before this Court. From perusal of the judgment, it transpires that the appellant Insurance Company neither examined any witness nor proved the Insurance Policy in support of their case that liability under the policy was restricted to Rs. 15,000/-. There is a categorical finding of the Tribunal that both the drivers of the trekker and the bus were rashly and negligently driving the vehicles which resulted the accident. We are. therefore, of the view that in absence of Insurance policy and other evidence the Tribunal rightly held that both the insurer of the trekker and the bus of the Corporation should jointly pay the awarded amount. We do not find any gross error in the impugned judgment and award. However, it is clarified that the appellant Insurance Company shall pay half of the total compensation amount together with interest and the rest half of the compensation together with interest shall be paid by the respondents Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Ranchi. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, both the appeals are disposed of. Vishnudeo Narayan, J. I agree.