NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. HALKAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant/ insurer has filed this appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 ( in short 'the Act') being aggrieved by the award dated 8.8.03 passed by the MACT, Chhatarpur in MVC Case No.34/02 whereby the claim of respondents No.1 and 2 filed under section 166 of the Act regarding the vehicular death of their son Mathura Prasad aged 25 years, has been awarded against the appellant as well as respondents No.3 and 4 the registered owner and driver of the offending vehicle by saddling their joint and several liability for the sum of Rs.1,79,800/- along with interest on the same @ 9% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition and cost of the claim petition Rs.1000/-.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that on 31.10.99 the above named Mathura Prasad, son of respondent No.1 and 2, was subjected to an accident by the Tata Jonga model vehicle bearing registration No.MKC-8192 registered in the name of respondent No.4 and driven by respondent No.3 in a rash and negligent manner near some restaurant at Sagar road, Chhatarpur resultantly he sustained the fatal injuries and succumbed to the same on the spot. On receiving the information, the marg intimation as well as the crime was registered against respondent No.3. The dead body was sent to the hospital where its postmortem was carried-out. After receiving such report, on holding the investigation, the respondent No.3 was charge sheeted for the alleged offence of section 304-A of the IPC. In further averments of the claim petition it is stated that deceased being aged 25 years, was earning Rs.200/- per day and his parents respondents No.1 and 2 were dependent on him and on account of his untimely death, they have been deprived of their dependency. Besides this, they have also suffered the mental agony. It is further stated that on the date of the accident, the aforesaid vehicle was registered in the name of respondent No.4 while the same was insured with the appellant/company. In such premises the impugned claim was preferred by respondent No.1 and 2 for the sum of Rs.6,92,000/-.

(3.) In reply of respondent No.3 driver, the facts with respect of the accident stated in the claim petition, are denied. However it was admitted that the vehicle was registered in the name of respondent No.4 while the same was insured with the appellant. So, in such premises, if any liability is saddled against the respondent No.3 then in the light of insurance policy, the same be saddled against the appellant and, in such premises, prayer for exonerating this respondent is made.