Jat High Court
Case Details
1 Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR NAFR MAC No. 1704 of 2017 1 - Ramkali Banjare W/o Late Dukalu Banjare, Aged About 59 Years R/o Village Bhuniyapara Vijaytarai, Currently R/o At Ambedkar Nagar Mini Basti Jarhabhata Ward No.07, Bilaspur Tahsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Anupa Kosale D/o Sanjay Kosale, Aged About 11 Years Minor Through Maternal Grand Mother Ramkali Banjare Aged About 59 Years W/o Late Dukalu Banjare, R/o Village Bhuniyapara Vijaytarai, Currently R/o At Ambedkar Nagar Mini Basti Jarhabhata Ward No.07, Bilaspur Tahsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Krishnkant Kosale S/o Sanjay Kosale, Aged About 10 Years Minor Through Maternal Grand Mother Ramkali Banjare Aged About 59 Years W/o Late Dukalu Banjare, R/o Village Bhuniyapara Vijaytarai, Currently R/o At Ambedkar Nagar Mini Basti Jarhabhata Ward No.07, Bilaspur Tahsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ...............Claimants, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 2 1 - Tilakraj Chandrakar S/o Manharan Lal Chandrakar, R/o At Village Kholi P.S. Kharora District Raipur, Current R/o At Ambedkar Nagar P.S. Civil Lines Raipur Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh .............Driver Of Offending Vehicle Bearing Registered No. C.G.04 H C 6025, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Purishottam Chandrakar S/o Late Bhulauram Chandrakar, R/o At Badjhad Chowk, Near Durga Mandir, Shyamnagar Raipur Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh .............Owner Of Offending Vehicle Bearing Registered No. C.G.04 H C 6025, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
Legal Reasoning
3 - Bharti Axa General Insurance Company Limited, Head Office First Floor, Famous Icon Survey, No. 28, Dodankundi, Village K.R.Puram, Branch Office Branch Manager, First Floor Chawala Complex, Devendra Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh .............Insurer Of Offending Vehicle Bearing Registered No. C.G.04 H C 6025, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant (s)
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Suresh Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent(s) No. 2. : Mr. Mayank Chandrakar, Advocate. For Respondent/ : Mr. Harshmander Rastogi, Advocate. Insurance Company Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 13/06/2025 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, against the award dated 06.09.2017 passed 3 by the learned 5th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.), in Claim Case No. 499/2014 (“Ramkali Banjare & Ors. Vs.Tilakraj Chandrakar & Ors.”). 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, on 10.11.2014 at about 6:30 PM, deceased Shakun Kosale was travelling in a Maruti Alto car bearing registration number CG-04/HC-6025, driven by respondent No. 1, when the vehicle met with an accident near Mayoor School, Umariya, under P.S. Mandir Hasoud, District Raipur as the driver, in a rash and negligent manner, lost control of the vehicle, causing it to veer off the road and crash, resulting in grievous injuries to Shakun Kosale. She was taken to Dr. Ambedkar Hospital, Raipur, where she succumbed to her injuries during treatment. Crime No. 12/2014 was registered under Sections 279, 337, and 304A IPC. The claimants stated that Shakun was the sole breadwinner, earning Rs. 6,000/- per month as a nurse at Ramkrishna Hospital, Raipur, and an additional Rs. 4,000/- from part-time advertising work, totaling Rs. 10,000/- per month. She was about 25 years old at the time of her death and supported her dependents, as her husband had been living separately for 7 years. The claimants also incurred Rs. 25,000/- towards funeral expenses. While the driver and owner remained ex parte, the insurance company filed a written statement denying liability, arguing that the deceased was not a 4 third party, that her income and age were misrepresented, and that the driver did not possess a valid license. The Tribunal held the driver negligent in causing the death and awarded compensation, but exonerated the insurance company from liability, placing the burden of compensation solely on the driver and owner. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has filed this appeal on behalf of the claimants for the enhancement of the award. In the present case, the insurance company is exonerated as the driving license was not effective at the time of the incident. After issuance of notice to respondent No. 2 who is the owner of vehicle has filed cross objection stating that due to non service of notice he could not appear before the Tribunal and as such he could not adduce evidence as well as documents. He was having valid driving license but since it was not produced as such the Tribunal has held that the owner was not having driving license and it was breach of policy as such the liability was fastened upon the owner and the insurance company has been exonerated. By filing counter appeal under Order 41 Rule 22 of CPC the owner has filed various documents along with affidavit while stating that the address of the owner has been changed due to which notice could not served him properly and he could not file documents and has also not adduced evidence in this respect. 5 4. Learned counsel appearing for the owner submits that the matter may be remanded so that the documents may be filed and appropriate award may be passed while fastening liability upon the Insurance company on the basis of documents filed by the owner. 5. Learned counsel for the Insurance company objected the same stating that the appellant was having opportunity to file the documents and to adduce the evidence. The notice was rightly served upon the address given and as such the matter cannot be remanded. 6. Considering the fact that the owner was ex parte and further considering the fact that from the documents filed along with the cross-appeal it appears that the owner is having driving license at the time of incident as such in order to do complete justice the matter is remanded back to the concerned tribunal for deciding the matter a fresh. 7. Accordingly, the award dated 06.09.2017 passed by the learned 5th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) is hereby set aside. 8. Since the matter is remanded back to the concerned Tribunal the claimants are also entitled to file appropriate relevant documents 6 in addition to the documents which has been filed and after considering the documents evidence be recorded and thereafter the claim case be decided in accordance with law. This be done within a period of three months. 9. Parties are directed to appear before the concerned tribunal on 30th June, 2025. 10. No notice would be required to any of the parties, all the parties are present here. On the said date all the parties are directed to appear. No separate notice is required to be issued.
Decision
11. Accordingly, the instant MAC stands disposed of. 12. The record of the Tribunal along with copy of this order be sent back forthwith for the information and necessary action, if any. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat