RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. MEM WATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM No.21639 -CII of 2014 For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. The delay of 40 days in re -filing the appeal is condoned.

(2.) FAO No.8040 of 2014 Appellant Reliance General Insurance Company Limited has filed this appeal against Smt.Mem Wati and other respondents, challenging the impugned Award dated 15.03.2014 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Palwal (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal'), vide which Rs. 30,75,516/ - along with interest at the rate of 7% per annum has been awarded to the claimants from the date of filing of petition till realization of the awarded amount.

(3.) THE brief facts of the case are that Smt.Mem Wati and other respondents -claimants filed claim petition against Bhagwat (driver), Deepak Chaudhary (owner) and Reliance General Insurance (Insurer) of offending Maruti Zen car bearing registration No.HR -30D - 4069, under Section 166/140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It is stated in the claim petition that on 08.08.2010, Ram Veer Singh was coming from his village to NSG Camp Manesar on his motorcycle bearing registration No.RJ -05SP -9648 at a moderate speed. At about 4.30, when he reached in front of Master Ajamat Memorial School, Hodal Nuh road, the offending vehicle bearing registration No.HR - 30D -4069 driven by respondent -driver at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, came from the back side and hit his motorcycle from the back side. He fell down on the road and received multiple grievous injuries. Due to the serious injuries, Ram Veer Singh expired on 12.08.2010. Post -mortem examination was got conducted on the dead body. It is further stated that the accident was witnessed by Keshav Dev, who was following the deceased at that time. FIR No.277 dated 12.08.2010 under Section 279, 337 and 304 -A was registered against respondent -driver. Deceased Ram Veer Singh was 26 years of age and working as Commando in 11 SRG NSG Manesar, Gurgaon in Central Reserve Police Force and drawing Rs. 25,000/ - per month. Claimants claimed compensation of Rs. 75 lacs. On the other hand, respondents -driver and owner, in the written statement, denied the accident with the vehicle in question due to rash and negligent driving of respondent -driver. It is further stated that FIR is totally false and has been got lodged in order to extract huge money from the respondents. It is also stated that vehicle is insured with Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Insurance Company filed separate written statement (in claim petition) and took same plea as taken by respondents driver and owner.