CHHOTI BAI Vs. SURENDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has filed this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") being aggrieved by not only the amount of award passed in M.V.C.No.155/05 by 11th Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur, but also the apportionment given to her being mother of deceased Rajendra Patel. On the other hand Insurance Co. has filed cross-objection under Order 41 Rule 22 of CPC being aggrieved by order of fastening the liability on it on the ground that the vehicle was not insured at the time of accident and there was no effective policy, so the insurance company was not liable.

(2.) IT is an undisputed fact that appellant Chhoti Bai is the mother, respondent no.4 Smt. Sunita is the widow, and respondent no.5 Ku. Stuti Patel is the daughter of deceased Rajendra Patel who was employed as a Professor in Engineering College, Jabalpur. Respondents no.1 and 2 have been arrayed as Driver and Owner of the offending vehicle and respondent no.3 is the Insurer.

(3.) LEARNED Tribunal, after due trial and recording the evidence of Arjun Singh Bhadoria (CW.1), Ramsakha Mishra (CW.2)as eye witnesses, Chhoti Bai (CW.3) mother of deceased and Smt. Sunita (CW.4), widow, claimants, on 18.04.06 passed the aforesaid award and by fastening the liability on Insurer as well as driver and owner of aforesaid Maruti car directed to pay Rs.8,30,300/- as compensation. Out of which Rs.5,000/- has been awarded to widow on account of loss of consortium. Thereafter, from the remaining amount, 10% amount was ordered to be awarded to appellant and 10% to respondent no.4, Smt.Sunita widow, and remaining 80% was awarded to respondent no.5 Ku.Stuti Patel, daughter of deceased against which this appeal has been filed.