NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. BALU @ BALASAHEB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appeal arises out of judgment and award in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 793 of 2011 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmednagar, on 28-02-2017. The present appellant - original opponent no.02 has challenged the said award mainly on the ground that the Insurance Company has been directed to pay the compensation first and then to recover the amopunt from opponent no.01. Compensation of Rs. 4,24,600/-, inclusive of amount of Rs. 25,000/- towards 'no fault liability' has been granted together with interest at the rate of 9 % per annum from the date of the petition till actual realization of entire amount. [Parties are referred as per their nomenclature before the Tribunal.]

(2.) It is necessary to take a short story in respect of the manner in which the accident took place and with which parties had come before the Tribunal. The applicant along with others was travelling from Scorpio Jeep bearing No. MH-16/AB1293 towards village Loni Venkanath on 03-09-2011. One Ambadas Uttam Shelar was driving the said jeep. When they were near village Makharewadi, Taluka Shrigonda, at about 01.00 p.m., due to the rash and negligent driving, the jeep fell into the ditch, as a result of which, the applicant sustained injuries to his head and spine. Even after taking treatment for a long period, the applicant has sustained permanent physical disability. The said vehicle was owned by opponent no.01 and it was insured with opponent no.02 on the date of the accident.

(3.) The opponent no.01 resisted the claim and denied all the contents regarding rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver. It is stated that the applicant had requested the jeep driver to give lift and therefore, on his request, he was travelling from the said vehicle. Due to the rainy season, the jeep skidded and it was not due to the rashness or negligence. Opponent no.02 - Insurance Company by filing written statement, mainly took objection that the applicant was a gratuitous passenger travelling from a private vehicle. Opponent no.01 had hired the said jeep and therefore, risk of the passenger was not covered under the policy. There was clear breach of terms of policy and therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable to indemnify opponent no.01 for the compensation.