AMIR SAI Vs. ANITA SHIVHARE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Dismissal of the claim petition preferred by the parents of the deceased, who was driving the Jeep involved in the accident, is the subject matter of challenge in this appeal.

(2.) The sequence of events shows that the deceased, by name, Sharda Prasad aged about 22 years, was driving a Jeep bearing No.CG16/A/0053, owned by Respondent No.1 and insured by Respondent No.2 on 11.03.2011. When the vehicle reached the place of occurrence, the driver lost the control and the vehicle met with an accident, causing fatal injuries to the driver of the Jeep, who succumbed to the same. This led to a claim petition preferred before the Tribunal by the parents under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation against the owner and insurer of the vehicle. It was contended that the deceased was actually working as a driver and used to earn a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month. The claim was opposed from the part of the Respondents, particularly by the Insurance Company, to the effect that no liability could be fastened upon them; as it does not come within the purview of the policy. On conclusion of the trial, the Tribunal passed the award holding that the incident was self-invited/inflicted accident and that the deceased was driving the vehicle after consuming liquor as disclosed from Ex.P/1 (postmortem report). It was accordingly, that the claim petition was dismissed, which is now the subject matter of consideration in this appeal.

(3.) The learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the Tribunal was not correct in dismissing the claim petition, merely finding fault with the deceased driver, merely on the basis of postmortem report that the deceased had consumed liquor. It is contended that no doctor was examined and as such, the course pursued by the Tribunal is not in conformity with the relevant provisions of law or facts and requires to be interdicted by this Court.