SHAMIM KHAN AND ANR Vs. RAMKALI AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pooran Singh, the husband of the first respondent and the bread winner for other members of the family, they being second to sixth respondents (collectively, the claimants), was travelling in a motor vehicle described as Tata Sumo bearing registration no.HR-63-6854 (Tata Sumo) on 08.10.2005 from Delhi to Aligarh (U.P.). The vehicle met with an accident in the area of police station Lodha, Aligarh involving collision against another vehicle described as an ambulance bearing registration no.UP-81N-9900 (ambulance) and died as a result of the injuries suffered.

(2.) The claimants instituted accident claim case (suit no.131/06) impleading the driver, owner and insurer of the ambulance they being seventh, eight and ninth (as also tenth) respondents herein besides the driver and owner of the Tata Sumo (they being the appellants) in addition to its insurer (eleventh respondent herein). Noticeably, the allegations in the claim proceedings were that drivers of both vehicles were negligent. Further, noticeably, the eleventh respondent, the insurer of the Tata Sumo took the defence, inter alia, that it was not liable to indemnify since the vehicle was being plied for commercial purposes which was in breach of the insurance policy (Ex. R6W1/3).

(3.) The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal), after inquiry, by judgment dated 17.04.2007, awarded compensation in the sum of Rs. 2,30,000/- in favour of the claimants. It found the drivers of both the vehicles guilty of contributory negligence and apportioned the liability amongst them in the ratio 50:50. The Tribunal directed the insurer of the ambulance (ninth / tenth respondent) to pay the compensation but granted right to it to recover 50% from the appellant herein, insurer of the Tata Sumo having been exonerated.