ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. NITAICHANDRA SAHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Oriental Insurance Company Limited has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1988') questioning the legality and propriety of the award dated 12.11.2014 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, South Bastar, Dantewada (C.G.) in Claim Case No.354/2014, whereby the learned Tribunal, while fastening the liability upon the Insurance Company, has awarded the total amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.18,70,800/- with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment with a further direction that on its default, it shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of award till the date of actual payment. While, the claimants have raised a cross-objection under Order 41 Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC') for its enhancement. The parties to this appeal shall be referred hereinafter as per their description in the Tribunal.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 21.06.2012, the deceased Smt. Pushpa Saha was going to Village Budadi from Village Sukma by a motorcycle 'Pulsar' bearing Registration No.CG-18-E-7422 while sitting behind her son's friend namely, Arjun Singh Markam/Non-Applicant No.1. The alleged vehicle was owned by Non-Applicant No.2/Durgesh Rai and was insured with the Appellant/The Oriental Insurance Company Limited and it was being driven in a rash and negligent manner by said Arjun Singh Markam, owing to which, she fell down and sustained serious injuries. She was admitted into the hospital but succumbed to the injuries during the course of her treatment, giving rise to the institution of the claim petition under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 by her legal representatives, who are her husband and sons. It was alleged in the claim petition that the deceased, a 50 years old, was a government employee working as a Rural Health Coordinator (Nurse) in the Primary Health Centre, Sukma at the monthly wages of Rs.20,885/-. According to the claimants, the deceased was the only bread earner in the family and they were dependent upon her and, thus, have claimed total amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.24,00,000/- under various heads.

(3.) The Non-Applicants have contested the claim. According to the Non-Applicant Nos.1 and 2, the driver and owner of the alleged motorcycle, the deceased herself was responsible for the alleged accident as she was travelling in the said vehicle while sitting carelessly and owing to which, she fell down suddenly from it. It is pleaded further that since the alleged vehicle was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, therefore, in case of any liability being fastened, the same could be indemnified by the said company. While, the Non-Applicant No.3/Insurer has contested the claim mainly on the ground that the alleged motorcycle was being used in violation of the insurance policy as its driver was not holding the effective and valid driving license and, therefore, no liability could be fastened upon it.