VISHAL WALIA Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the award dtd. 28/7/2012, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Fast Track Court), Solan (hereinafter referred to as 'MACT, Solan), vide which the appellant (petitioner before the learned MACT) was held entitled to Rs.98,252.00 along with interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till deposit of the amount. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience).

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the petitioner filed a claim petition before learned MACT seeking compensation of Rs.5,00,000.00 for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident involving the vehicles bearing registration no. HP-63-0862 and HP-141581. It was asserted that the petitioner was riding the scooter. Dinesh Kumar was sitting as a pillion rider. A truck bearing registration no. HP-63-0862 came from the opposite side and hit the scooter on the wrong side. The petitioner and the pillion rider sustained injuries. The driver of the truck ran away from the spot. Dinesh Kumar succumbed to his injuries in the hospital. The petitioner sustained multiple injuries in the accident and he remained admitted to the hospital. He remained confined to the bed for about one month including the time spent in the hospital. He spent more than Rs.40,000.00 on his treatment. An FIR No. 205 of 2004 was registered for the commission of offences punishable under Ss. 279 and 304-A IPC against the petitioner; however, it was wrongly manipulated by the truck driver taking advantage of the absence of the petitioner. The accident was caused due to the negligence of the driver of the truck. Hence, the petition was filed to seek the compensation mentioned above.

(3.) The petition was opposed by respondents no.1 and 2 by filing a reply denying the contents of the claim petition. It was asserted that the petitioner and pillion rider were under the influence of liquor. The truck was on its correct side. The petitioner came to the wrong side and hit a stationary truck. The accident had taken place due to the negligence of the petitioner. There was no negligence of the truck driver. The FIR was recorded on the basis of the facts. In the alternative, it was asserted that the vehicle was duly insured with respondent no.3-Insurance Company and compensation, if any, has to be paid by the Insurance Company. Hence, it was prayed that Insurance Company be directed to pay the same.