Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 2767 (RAJ)

New India Assurance Co Ltd v. Rajmal

2019-10-30

PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

body2019
JUDGMENT Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matters have been heard finally. 2. Both these misc. appeals under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 have been preferred, the Appeal No.205/2003 has been preferred by the Insurance Company and Appeal No.804/2005 has been preferred by the appellant-claimant, claiming the following reliefs: CMA No.205/2003: "It is, therefore, prayed that this appeal may kindly be allowed and the impugned judgment dated 19.12.2002 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in MACT Case No.87 of 2001 insofar as it relates to appellant the New India Assurance Company Limited may kindly be set aside." CMA No.804/2005: "It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this appeal may kindly be allowed with costs and the impugned judgment and award dated 19.12.2002 passed by learned MACT, Chittorgarh in claim case No.87/2001 may kindly be set aside and compensation calculated by learned tribunal may be modified and enhanced up to as claimed by the appellants in their claim petition. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble High Court may find fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be awarded." 3. The unfortunate accident had happened on 31.12.1995 when mini truck bearing registration No. MP14 G 2176 being driven rashly and negligently, met with an accident causing grievous injuries to the claimant. 4. Learned counsel for Insurance Company has raised two issues; firstly, a driving license is being of non-transport vehicle, and secondly, the claimant was travelling as a gratuitous passenger and thus, was not entitled for any relief. 5. Learned counsel for the claimant submits that the driving license of Light Motor Vehicle is not disputed and the driver not possessing a valid transport driving license for the same is an issue covered by the precedent law laid down by the Apex Court in Mukund Dewangan Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., (2017) 14 SCC 663 . 6. Learned counsel for the claimant further submits that a bare perusal of Exhibit-8, which is a copy of the original policy, clearly reflects that the policy was covering 3+2+1 persons, and thus, the claimant even if was a passenger, was covered by the policy in question. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant however, submits that there is no evidence rendered by the Insurance Company pertaining to the breach of policy or the claimant being a gratuitous passenger. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant however, submits that there is no evidence rendered by the Insurance Company pertaining to the breach of policy or the claimant being a gratuitous passenger. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties as well as perusing the record of the case, this Court finds that Exhibit-8 clearly reflects that the policy is covering 3+2+1 persons, and admittedly, there is no evidence contrary to the same. 9. This Court has also perused Exhibit-9, which is disability certificate (reflecting 90% disability) which is not being denied. Since the driver was having a valid driving license as per the precedent law of Mukund Dewangan (supra) and also there is no evidence on record to show that the passenger in question was not covered under the policy, therefore, there is no infirmity in the impugned order. Hence, the appeal No. 205/2003 of the Insurance Company fails. 10. As regards appeal of the claimant, looking into the disability certificate, learned counsel for the parties were asked to jointly submit the computation afresh treating the disability to be 90% as per Exhibit-9, as per the revised guidelines for settlement in MACT cases as issued by Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority dated 05.11.2018. The joint computation, as furnished by learned counsel for the parties before this Court, reads as follows:- Age of the Injured 23 years Permanent Disability (90%) [Rs.25,000+(90x6000)] Rs.5,65,000/- Hospitalisation (25 days) (Rs.1100 x 25) Rs.27,500/- Total Rs.5,92,500/- Pain & Sufferings (25% of total Rs.5,92,500) Rs.1,48,125/- Medical Expenses Rs.5,010/- Total Award Rs.7,45,635/- Amount already awarded by the Tribunal Rs.1,70,000/- Enhanced Award Rs.5,75,635/- 11. In view of the above and as per the revised guidelines for settlement in MACT cases as issued by Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority dated 05.11.2018, the enhanced award of Rs.5,75,635/- is granted which shall be payable along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till actual payment is made. The enhanced amount is to be paid within three months from today, failing which the same shall carry interest @ 9% per annum for the subsequent period (i.e. after three months from today) till actual payment is made. 12. For the foregoing reasons and observations made hereinabove, the Appeal No.205/2003 preferred by Insurance Company is dismissed and the Appeal No.804/2005 preferred by the claimant is disposed of in the above terms. All the pending applications stand dismissed.