New India Assurance Company Limited vs Rashida Bee & Ors

These three connected appeals have been filed by the appellant New India Assurance Company Ltd. for assailing the impugned judgment and award dated 08.07.2019 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.2 Bhilwara in separate claim applications Nos.286/2018 (308/2017); 292/2018 (309/2017); & 285/2018 (310/2017), whereby the claim applications preferred by the respondents-claimants were accepted and they were awarded damages as below:-

S.No.

Motor Accident Claim No.

Claim awarded

1.

286/2018

Rs.3,50,000/-

2.

292/2018

Rs.10,000/-

3.

285/2018

Rs.12,94,712/-

Brief facts of the case are that the two deceased persons Maqbool and Najmeen and the injured Rashida Bee were proceeding on a motorcycle from their village towards Ajmer. They had reached the bridge of the river Banas at the Hamirgarh Highway at about 11:30 am in the morning. The tractor No. RJ 06 RB 8784 (driven by respondent Satyanarain, owned by respondent Udailal and insured by the appellant Insurance Company) was proceeding ahead of the motorcycle. The driver of the tractor abruptly applied brakes thereby stopping the tractor without any prior warning or indication, as a result whereof the motorcycle collided with the tractor-trolly resulting into the death of Najmeen and Maqbool and injuries being caused to Rashida Bee. An FIR No.08/2017 was lodged at the Police Station Hamirgarh District Bhilwara. The claimants filed three claim applications, two for the death cases and one for the injury case which came to be allowed, as above.

The appellant Insurance Company has assailed the judgment and award by filing these civil misc. appeals. The only contention of Shri Sanjeev Johari, Advocate representing the appellant Insurance Company for assailing the impugned judgment was that the accident took place because of contributory negligence of the motorcycle driver Shri Maqbool, the deceased and as such the damages awardable should have been reduced suitably by considering proportional negligence of the motorcycle driver. He thus, urges that the impugned award is bad in facts as well as in law and the appeals are fit to be admitted.

I have considered the submissions raised by Shri Johari and have gone through the impugned judgment. It is clear from a perusal of the trial court's findings that Rashida Bee, the claimant who was injured in the accident was not given any such suggestion during her cross-examination that the accident occurred owing to the contributory negligence of her husband Shri Maqbool. The burden of proving this assertion of contributory negligence was upon the appellant Insurance Company. I have perused the affidavit of the Insurance Company's witness Shri Babulal Meena and find that not a word had been uttered in this affidavit that the motorcycle driver contributed to the accident by his negligence in any manner whatsoever. Therefore, no material whatsoever is available on the record of the case which can satisfy the Court that the appellant Insurance Company was able to discharge the burden cast upon it to prove the factum of contributory negligence attributed by the respondents-claimants. No other contention was advanced by learned counsel for the appellant Insurance Company for assailing the impugned judgment and award.

In view of the above discussion, I am of the opinion that the impugned judgment-cum-award dated 08.07.2019 does not suffer from any infirmity whatsoever warranting interference and admission of the appeals. As a consequence, I find the appeals to be devoid of merits and same are hereby dismissed summarily.