NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. BABITA JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rakesh Kumar Jain, a business man, aged about 40 years, was moving on his two wheeler scooter bearing registration No.DL-4S-AN-5312 (the scooter) on 14.05.2008 from Lawrence Road to his residence in the area of Pitam Pura, New Delhi via Mahindra Park. An Alto car bearing registration No.DL-8CH-7228 (the car) is stated to have been moving ahead of it on the same road. As per the averments in the accident claim case (MACT Case No. 84/2014) filed by first to fifth claimants (collectively, the claimants), the car driver suddenly stopped his vehicle and opened his door, this resulting in the scooterist losing balance and falling down on the road at about 11.00 am. Around the same time, bus bearing registration No.DL-1PB-3533 (the bus) plying on State carriage route No. 970 is stated to have come at the scene from behind at a high speed and run over the scooterist lying on the road crushing him to death.

(2.) The appellant herein is concededly the insurer against third party risk in respect of the bus which was driven at the relevant point of time by the fifth respondent, it being a vehicle registered in the name of seventh respondent. The car, as per the record and the pleadings, was registered in the name of the ninth respondent but admittedly in use and control of the eighth respondent, the latter having been described as the driver of the car.

(3.) The Tribunal held inquiry into the claim petition wherein it had been alleged that the accident had occurred due to negligence on the part both of the car driver and the bus driver. On the basis of evidence that was adduced, the Tribunal, by judgment dated 10.3.2016, upheld the case for compensation on the principle of fault liability under Sec. 166, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It awarded compensation in the total sum of Rs. 27,24,819.00 and fastened the liability to pay on the insurer of the bus (the appellant), not apportioning any liability on the driver or registered owner of the car observing in this context only that the said vehicle was "not insured" and further that the claimants could seek compensation from any of the insurer of the vehicles involved in the accidents which are at fault.