ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. CHETNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall also govern the disposal of M. A. Nos. 1019, 1021, 1022 and 1153 of 2003 as all the appeals are arising out of one accident and parties to the appeal are the same except the claimants. Short facts of the case are that a motor accident took place in the intervening night of 8/9. 9. 2001 while the claimants were travelling in a Tempo Trax bearing registration No. UP 95-0588 which was driven by one Santosh who is respondent no. 2 and owned by respondent No. 3 at the relevant time. Tempo Trax dashed a truck bearing registration No. RJ 20-V 3773 which was driven by respondent No. 4, owned by respondent No. 5 and insured with respondent No. 6. In the said accident, 5 persons died and 2 persons were injured. The claim petition was contested by the appellant and respondent No. 6.

(2.) AFTER framing of issues and recording of evidence, learned Tribunal allowed the claim petitions and awarded the following amount: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_2326_ACJ_2008Html1.htm</FRM>

(3.) IN all the cases, learned Tribunal held that accident occurred because of rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 2 and also negligence on the part of respondent no. 4, who parked the vehicle in the middle of the road. In the circumstances, the learned Tribunal apportioned the liability in the ratio of 50:50 between respondent nos. 2 and 3 and the appellant and respondent nos. 4 to 6. In all the appeals filed by appellant Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. , the ground taken is that since the offending jeep was insured as private vehicle and was used by the deceased and insured as transport vehicle, therefore, appellant insurance company is not liable for payment of 50 per cent of the awarded amount. Mr. Pradeep gupta, learned counsel for appellant further submits that since the driver of the offending jeep was possessing a driving licence of light motor vehicle and not for transport vehicle, therefore, the driver was not having valid driving licence as there was no endorsement from the concerned r. T. O. It is submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, learned Tribunal committed error in holding the appellant responsible for payment of compensation.