ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. SHYAMA DEVI SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Misc. Appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellant/Insurance Company against the award dated 03.03.2015, passed by the Member, Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sidhi, in Claim Case No. MVC No. 13/2014, whereby the award of Rs. 8,31,908/- has been passed in favour of claimants/respondents No. 1 to 8.

(2.) The claim of respondent Nos. 1 to 8 in brief is that respondent No. 1 and 4 to 8 are the wife and children of deceased Umesh Kumar Sahu and respondents No. 2 and 3 are his parents. Umesh Kumar was aged about 36 years, who was working as Driver and earns Rs. 4000/- per month as salary and Rs. 1200/- daily allowances. On 23.08.2007 the deceased Umesh was travelling in a Mini bus bearing registration M.P.53-E/0454 as a passenger and going to Sidhi from this village Nigri. When Bus reaches in Lohjhar Forest area, the Bus driver Ajit Kumar (Respondent No. 10) drove the Bus rashly and negligently and dashed against a Dumper bearing registration No. M.P.-20-G-6666 coming from opposite direction. In the accident Umesh Kumar sustained serious injuries. He was taken to Government Hospital, Sidhi and thereafter shifted to Jabalpur for treatment where he had expired. The police registered an offence against driver of dumper who had absconded after the accident and seized the bus and after investigation a charge-sheet has been filed against him. Respondent No. 9 Arun Kumar Singh was the registered owner of the Bus and it was insured with the appellant. It is pleaded by the claimants that the deceased was sole bread winner of the family, claimants are dependent upon him. Rs. 4 Lacs were spent in the treatment of deceased. Claimants have no source of income. Therefore, the claimants have filed the petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 for grant of compensation of Rs. 13,26,000/- on account of death of deceased against appellant and respondent Nos. 9 and 10.

(3.) In their written statement respondents No. 9 and 10 denied the averments made in the claim petition. It is denied that the vehicle of respondents was involved in the accident. They have admitted that they are the owner and driver of the Bus. In alternate it is pleaded that respondents No. 10 was having valid driving license to driver the vehicle. There is no breach of any condition of insurance policy. The accident occurred because of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the dumper. Therefore, respondents are not liable to pay any compensation to claimants.