SASHIREKHA BARIK Vs. RABINDRA MISHRA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This MACA arises out of an award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - IV, Bhadrak in MAC Case No.04 of 2006 at the instance of the owner-appellant challenging the saddling of a part of the liability on the owner.

(2.) Short facts involved in the case is that one Ratan Kumar Mishra-the deceased while returning from Tihidi to Bhadrak in a Commander Jeep bearing Regd.No.OR-01F-5576 on 30.5.2005 at about 6 P.M, the Commander jeep met with an accident on the right side of the road due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the said jeep. The deceased fell down and in the process sustained serious injuries on different parts of his body. The deceased was shifted to Tihidi C.H.C and during treatment, he succumbed to injuries. In the Claim Application, the legal representatives of the deceased claiming the earning of deceased Rs.3000/- per month who was a helper in a Truck had prayed for appropriate compensation. The owner as well as the Insurance Company contested the matter in filing the written statement and denied the claim made by the claimants. Upon hearing the parties, the Claims Tribunal after holding that the deceased suffered on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle and taking into consideration the Insurance policy, fixed joint liability on both the Insurance Company as well as on the owner of the vehicle and particularly fixing the liability on the Insurance Company at Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh) and the balance amount was directed to be paid by the owner.

(3.) In assailing the aforesaid impugned award, Mr.Satpathy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-owner contended that the accident had taken place on 30.5.2005 and looking to the condition of the Insurance policy particularly looking to the limits of the liability on the Insurance policy, the limit of the Insurance Company was up to Rs.7,50,000/-(Rupees Seven Lakhs Fifty thousand) and thus contended that fixing of partial liability on the owner is erroneous and contrary to the conditions of the policy.