SUKHDEV SINGH Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant-claimant has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short "Act of 1988") seeking enhancement of amount of compensation challenging the impugned award dated 31.03.2014 passed by learned 2nd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Surajpur, District Surajpur C.G. in claim case no. 70/2012 whereby learned Claims Tribunal allowed the application filed under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 and awarded sum of Rs. 3,030/- as compensation in an injury case.

(2.) Facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that on 30.03.2012 at about 08:30 PM Sukhdev Singh was returning to his house from his agricultural field after finishing his agricultural work, at that relevant time, one tractor bearing registration no. CG 15A 5669 (hereinafter referred to as "offending vehicle") owned by non-applicant 3/ Respondent 3 and driven by non- applicant 2/ Respondent 2 rashly and negligently dashed him and caused accident. In the said accident, Sukhdev Singh suffered grievous injury over his person, he was immediately taken to Ramajunganj hospital from where he was shifted to Ambikapur Mission Hospital. Accident was reported to concerned police station based upon which crime was registered against non-applicant 1 driver of offending vehicle. Injured/ claimant filed an application under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 seeking compensation of Rs. 1,40,000/- pleading therein that on account of motor accidental injury suffered by him, he suffered disability and not able to perform his work as he used to do prior to the date of accident. He took treatment as an in- patient at district hospital Ambikapur from 30.03.2012 to 09.04.2012 and has incurred expenditure of Rs. 40,000/-.

(3.) Non-applicant 1-Insurance Company submitted reply to the claim application, while denying the pleadings made therein, it was further pleaded that at the time of accident injured along with three other persons were traveling on tractor (offending vehicle) which over-turned and Mantru alias Ramsingh died due to motor accidental injuries suffered by him and claimant Sukhdev suffered injuries over his person. Claimant was traveling on the offending vehicle whose risk was not covered under the policy, he does not come within the purview of 3rd party; on the date of accident, offending vehicle was registered and insured for agricultural purpose but it was being used for commercial purpose (other than agricultural purpose) as such there was breach of policy conditions. Insurance Company is not having any liability to pay compensation.