Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1160 (MP)

Gundheram v. Rajveer Singh Mourya

2022-09-19

DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. This order shall govern the disposal of Misc. Appeal Nos.206/2015 and 412/2015. 2. Being aggrieved by the common award passed on 09.01.2015 in Claim Case No.63/2014 and 64/2014 by First Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Joura District Morenar (M.P.), appellants have preferred these appeals. M.A. No. 206/2015 has been filed on the ground that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in Claim No. 64/2014 is on lower side and the learned Tribunal has erred in exonerating the insurance company to pay the compensation while M.A. No. 412/2015 has been filed on the sole ground that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in Claim No.63/2014 is on lower side. 3. Brief facts of the case are that on 18.03.2014 at 10 am deceased of claim petition 63/2014 Ramlakhan was going on foot to village Chachiha. When he reached at Chachiha Road Bilgav, from Bilgav side respondent No.2 came driving offending motorcycle bearing registration No.MP06 MH 1119 rashly and negligently and dashed Ramlakahn due to which he died. 4. Chahua- deceased of Claim case No. 64/2014 was sitting on aforesaid motorcycle as pillion rider, met with an accident and sustained grievous injuries and later during treatment he succumbed to the said injuries. After the aforesaid accident took place, FIR was lodged against respondent No. 2 who was driving the said motorcycle. Dead body panchnamas of the both deceased were prepared. Postmortem was conducted. After investigation charge-sheet under Section 304-A of IPC on two counts was submitted before criminal court. At the time of accident both the deceased were 21 years of age. Both the deceased used to do masonary work and deceased Ramlakhan used to earn Rs. 10,000/- per month while deceased Chahua used to earn Rs.14,000/- per month. 5. Appellants in both the appeals were dependents on the earnings of deceased persons. 6. Learned Tribunal in case No. 63/2014 taking into account the income of deceased as Rs. 90,000/- per annum, deducting 1/2 towards loss of dependency, applying multiplier of 11 and adding Rs. 25,000/- towards funeral expenses, passed award to the tune of Rs.5,20,00/- and fastened liability to pay compensation on Insurance Company. In claim Case No.64/2014, learned Tribunal assessed the income of deceased as Rs.14,400/-, deducting 1/2 towards loss of dependency, applying multiplier of 11 and adding Rs. 25,000/- towards funeral expenses, passed award to the tune of Rs.5,20,00/- and fastened liability to pay compensation on Insurance Company. In claim Case No.64/2014, learned Tribunal assessed the income of deceased as Rs.14,400/-, deducting 1/2 towards loss of dependency, applying multiplier of 11 and adding Rs. 25,000/- towards funeral expenses, passed award to the tune of Rs.9,50,400/- and fastened liability to pay compensation on driver and owner of the offending vehicle. 8. Learned counsel for the claimants in claim Case No. 64/2014 submits that the policy of offending vehicle was comprehensive policy and deceased Chahua was sitting on the motorcycle as pillion rider. In these situation, relying upon the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Balakrishnan and Anr. reported in 2013 ACJ 199 , it is submitted that Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation. 9. This Court has gone through the policy and it prima facie appears that policy is comprehensive policy and Tribunal has committed error in exonerating Insurance company. This Court has gone through the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Balakrishnan (supra). After perusing the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Balakrishnan (supra), it is directed that the policy is a comprehensive policy and insurance company is liable to indemnify the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in claim case No.64/2014. 10. As far as quantum of compensation and income of deceased are concerned, having perused the impugned award as well as oral and documentary evidence and submission made by learned counsel for the rival parties, this court is of the opinion that the tribunal rightly assessed the income of deceased and quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and no interference is warranted. 11. In view of the above, the M.A. No.412/2015 is dismissed and M.A. No.206/2015 is partly allowed. Hence, the award passed by the Tribunal in Claim Case No. 64/2014 is modified to the extent hereinabove. In the facts of the case, parties are directed to bear their own costs.