UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LIMITED Vs. ANGREJ SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Against the impugned award passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court, Sirsa, the Insurance Company has filed the present appeal with a prayer that the said award is set aside qua the Insurance Company whereas the claimant has filed F.A.O. No. 3759 of 2008 wherein he has prayed for enhancement of the amount of compensation. Accordingly, both the appeals are being decided together. In his claim-petition filed under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicless Act, claimant-Angrej Singh prayed for grant of compensation of Rs. 8,00,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% per annum on account of the injuries and permanent disability sustained by him in a motor vehicular accident arising out of use of scooter No. HR-25A-6305. According to him, he alongwith his brother Devender Singh was going on the aforementioned scooter from Mandi Dabwali towards his village Alikan. When they reached near Shergarh, their scooter struck a car. A case bearing FIR No. 230 dated 5th November, 2004 was registered at Police Station City, Dabwali in respect of the accident. According to the claimant, he sustained serious and grievous injuries in the accident. His monthly income was not more than Rs. 4,000/-. He remained admitted in several hospitals and spent more than Rs. 1,50,000/- on his treatment. Despite the same, he required further treatment. The aforementioned scooter, which the claimant and his brother Devender Singh were riding on the day of accident, was owned by their brother Jitender Singh and insured with United India Insurance Company. Accordingly, Jitender Singh was arraigned as Respondent No.. 1 while Insurance Company as Respondent No. 2 in the claim petition. Upon notice, Respondent No. 1 was proceeded against ex parte. However, Respondent No. 2 filed the written statement wherein apart from taking preliminary objections regarding maintainability, cause of action, suppression of truth and material facts, petition being vague, incomplete and insufficient pleadings etc., it was alleged that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of Fiat car bearing registration No. DDU-6212. However, the said car was not insured and for that reason the claim-petition had been filed under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicless Act so as to claim compensation for the injuries received by the claimant on account of use of a Motor Vehicles. After hearing Learned Counsel for the parties and going through the records, learned Tribunal held that the accident in question had taken place due to use of scooter bearing No. HR-25A/6305. Although the claim was sought on the basis of no fault liability but even if the driver of the car was facing criminal proceedings, it made no difference,. Accordingly, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 1,64,700/- to the claimant as compensation against the Respondents jointly and severally alongwith interest @ 7% per annum. Admittedly, the scooter bearing registration No. HR-25A/6305 which was being used by the claimant and his brother for going from Mandi Dabwali towards their village Alikan, was owned by their brother Jitender Singh. For that reason, he filed the claim-petition under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicless Act by impleading his brother Jitender Singh as Respondent No. 1 and United India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the scooter belonging to Jitender Singh, as Respondent No. 2.

(2.) It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ningamma and Anr. v. United India Insurance Company Ltd., 2009 3 RCR(Civ) 435 that where the borrower of a vehicle died in the accident, his legal heirs were not entitled to claim compensation under Section 163A of the Act as borrower would be considered owner of the vehicle. The relevant observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court are as follows:

(3.) In New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Sadanand Mukhi and Ors., 2009 1 RCR(Civ) 817 the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the owner of a vehicle was not entitled to any claim where the accident took place on account of some animal coming in front of a Motor Vehicles. Even son of owner was not a third party in relation to Insurance Company.