Domar Sahu vs Smt. Chandrika Gupta

Sachin Singh Rajput, J

1) This appeal has been filed by the driver of the offending vehicle i.e. Motorcycle bearing Registration No. CG 04, D.P. 4693 against an award dated 17.04.2017 passed by learned Upper Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, FTC, Kabirdham, (CG) in Claim Case No.01/2016. While partly allowing an application under Section 166 of Motor Vehicle Act, the learned tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.4,60,000/- holding the driver and owner liable to pay compensation on account of death of the deceased Dholendra Gupta in an accident that occurred on 01.11.2015 by rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle by driver/appellant, owned with respondent No.6/owner and insured with respondent No.7/insurance company.

2) As per pleadings of the claim application, the deceased was aged about 40 years and he was having a food truck (Chat Gupchup) business and earning an income of Rs.30,000/-, therefore, amount of Rs.93,00,000 and Rs.37,00,000/- was claimed as compensation.

3) The claim application was resisted by driver, owner and insurance company of the offending vehicle on various grounds.

4) The learned tribunal on the basis of pleadings of the parties framed 4 issues and decided the same in favour of appellant/claimant.

5) Learned counsel for appellant submits that the learned tribunal has wrongly exonerated the insurance company from its liability and awarded excessive compensation, therefore, the impugned award is liable to be set aside.

6) Learned counsel for respondent No.7 supports the award and submits that the risk of the deceased being a pillion rider was not covered under the Act only policy issued by the insurance company, therefore, the finding recorded by learned tribunal is well merited and does not require any interference by this Court.

7) Heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the record.

8) The tribunal found the monthly income of the deceased to Rs.3,000/- which appears to be just. Apart from this, amount on other conventional is also justly awarded. The learned tribunal relying upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Oriental

Insurance Company Limited Vs. Smt. Kumari Bai and Ors. Reported in 2014 (1) CGLJ 440 held that the insurance policy is an Act only policy and risk of pillion rider is not covered thereby exonerated the insurance company. Therefore, the finding recorded by tribunal appears to be just, based on proper appreciation of evidence and does not require any interference by this Court, therefore, the appeal fails and is dismissed.