RAM SINGH Vs. DASHRATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall also govern the disposal of M.A.No.102/2012 which is the appeal filed by respondent No.3/Insurance company as in both the appeals the award under challenge is dated 11/10/2011 passed by MACT, Fast Track Court, Kukshi in claim case No.270/2010 whereby the claim petition filed by the appellants was allowed and compensation of Rs.3,52,500/- was awarded on account of death of Sakribai who died in the motor accident which took place on 17/12/2009.

(2.) Learned counsel for appellants submits that learned tribunal assessed the income @Rs.100/- per day but calculated the compensation @Rs.2,500/- per month, out of which 1/4th was deducted towards personal expenses and after applying the multiplier of 15, compensation was calculated. It is submitted that since accident is of the year 2009, therefore income assessed is on lower side. It is submitted that if the income was taken as Rs.100 per day, there was no justification to assess the income @ Rs.2,500/- per month and in all the heads the amount awarded is on tower side, hence prayed that appeal be allowed and amount be enhanced.

(3.) Learned counsel for respondent No.3 submits that amount awarded is on higher side. It is submitted that since the offending vehicle was being used in violation of terms of policy, therefore respondent No.3 ought to have been exonerated. It is further submitted that even if it is assumed that offending vehicle was being used for the purpose for which it was insured, then too, liability of respondent No.3 is limited to the extent of Rs.1 Lac per passenger. For this contention, reliance is placed on a decision in the matter of Divisional Manager. Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Arati Mishra., 2011 ACJ 196 wherein private jeep was insured under Act. Only Policy carrying gratuitous passengers, met with accident due to rash and negligent driving resulting in death of passengers, Orissa High Court held that Insurance company is not liable. United India Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs. C.Govardhan, 2008 ACJ 1140, wherein passengers travelling in a jeep which dashed against a truck and a passenger in jeep sustained injuries, insurance company sought to avoid its liability on the ground that jeep was insured voering third party risk and risk of injured who was a fare paying passenger was not covered, the jeep was not a public service vehicle and insurance of passengers travelling in it was optional and not compulsory, the jeep was insured under Act only policy and did not cover the risk of passengers, Andhra Pradesh High Court held that passenger is not a third party and Insurance company is not liable." It is submitted that appeal filed by the respondent No.3 be allowed and appeal filed by the appellant be dismissed.