IVIISCELLANEOUS APPEAL (C) N0 v. CLAIMANTS

Smt.'Vimla Bai Manikpuri, wife of Late Shri Pramod Das Manikpuri, aged about 25 years Kumari Gayatri, daughter of Late Shri Pramod Das Manikpuri, aged about 06 years Respondent No. 2 being minor represented through her mother Smt. Vimta Bai Smt. Sonarin Bai, wife of Late Shri Fagwadas Manikpuri, aged about 66 fi_M\ are residents of Village Mordha, Thana Mahasamund. Tehsil and Thana Mahasamund, Tehsil and District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh residing Presently Village Duttaiya, Thana Phingeshwar, Tehsil Rajim, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ILI k1" ^ '•-'"5. resident Tehsil of Shri 31 Village Parmanand Sahu, Kusharam Sahu, aged about years, Thana, Chingroadh, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ^U.^£RIVER) lesh^am) Sainik, son of Shri [Ra@h ^harat LaT, Sajnik, aged about 37 12, years, Purana Rawan Bhata, Mahasamund, Teshil Thana,.^ District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh resrdent of Ward No. uaa. (OWNER) IWEIVIORANDUM OF APPEAL UNOER SECTION 173 OF THE IVIOTOR VEHICLESACT1988 Appeal yalued at Rs. 3,27,Sfbo/- (Three Lakh Twentv Seven Thousand and Twp Hyndred OnlyJ ^ HI6H COURT OF CHHATriS6Afty_ATBILASPUR HON'BLE &R. I.M.QU&&USI & ^'BLE MR. 6. MINHAJUDDIN. JJ. M.A. tc] No. 1007/2011 IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co. LTd. Smt. Vimia Bai Manikpuri & others Mr. Tunushree &as, Advoca'te for the appellant. Mr. J.A. Lohani, Advocate for respondents No.l to 3. Mr. S. Pandya, Advocate for the respondents No.5. None for respondent No.4 despjte service of notice. Dr. I.M. Quddusi, J; 1 '?*

By way of this cupeal under Section 173 of the M.o-tor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Ac-t'), the appeilant-Insurance Company has impugned the award dated 26.3.2011 passed by the learned Additional Motor- Accident Claims Tribunal, Sariyabandh (for short the Ciaims Tribunnl') in Claim Case No.48/10.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 21.04.2010 due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of tractor-trolley bearing registration numbers C604-&M-2663 <& C604-DM-2664 respectively, the said vehicle, in which deceoised Pramod Sahu was traveiling, turned turtle as a resuit of which said Promod 5ahu suffered grievous injuries whjch resulted in his death. Report of the accident was iodged the Police Station Mahasamund. The claimants, who are widow, daughter & mother- of the deceased, have filed a claim appUcation before the Clnims Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.32,00,000/-on the ground that they were dependent on the deceased, who was s?Ie earning member in ths family, and due to his death, they have suffered loss of I'ncome.

The Claims Tribunal vide impuaned award partly allowed the claim application, awarded a sum of Rs.3,27,200/- and held the appellant herein ^ responsible to pay the amount of compensation.

We have heard learned counsel for- the appellont and the respondents No.l to 3 d 5 and perused the record of the Claims Tribunal as well as the Criminal Court.

Before the criminal Cour-t driver of the offending vehicle has confessed the commission of offence by him. It is also found from the statements as well as the fir-st information rsport etc. 1+iat the deceased was sitting in the trolley where there was no seat avaiinble for sitting. However, the Claims Tribunal has not framed any issue to the effect that whether there was any breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy or not. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the matter requires reconsider'ation at the end of the Claims Tribunal.

The Rsgistry is directed to tronsmit record of the Ciaims Tr-ibunat withoyt further'delay. No orcter as to costs. Sd/- DR. I.M.Quddusi Judge ; ! G. Minhajuddin Judge <F~-