ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. SHAM LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of order dated 7.1.2004 in complaint No. 33/2003, District Forum, Shimla camp at Nahan has allowed the complaint. Impugned order directs the appellant to indemnify the respondent in the sum of Rs.1, 47,846/ - with interest @ 12% per annum form the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 5.3.2003 till the actual payment was made. Appellant has also been burdened with litigation cost of Rs.2500/ -.

(2.) Vehicle being insured with the appellant and during the currency of the policy, it having met with an accident are the facts which are not in dispute. What was disputed by Dr. Lalit Sharma at the time of hearing was that, since there was clear cut violation of the terms of the policy of insurance as well as of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, therefore, his client was not liable for payment of any compensation. With a view to support this submission he placed reliance on the FIR Ex. D -1, statement of Dev Dutt Ex.D -11 before the motor Accident Claims Tribunal -1 Sirmaur, District at Nahan, H.P. in Nahan, H.P. in M.A.C. petition No. 199 -MAC/2 of 2001, and of Head Constable Sehdev Singh, Police Line, Nahan Ex.D -111 who had recorded the FIR Ex. D -1 This statement was also in MAC Petition No.3 of 2002 before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal -11, Sirmaur at Nahan. These pleas have been controverted by Sh. Verma Learned counsel for the respondent. Per him were traveling of the 11 alleged passengers by itself is no ground to reject the claim of his client and documents Exts. D -1 to D -111 in any manner do not improve the case of the appellant so as to call for interference in this appeal. Sh. Verma also placed reliance on a Photostat copy of the award/judgment dated 2.4.2003 in MAC petition No. 199 -2/2001, decided by MACT -1 Sirmaur District, at Nahan.

(3.) Record shows that the respondent claimed compensation in the sum of Rs. 2, 50,000/ - with interest @ 18% per annum, besides Rs. 50,000/ - by way of damages and cost of litigation. This claim was controverted by the appellant. Its stands before the Forum below was, that sole cause of the accident was carriage of 11 passengers in the vehicle at the time of accident who were not authorized to travel when it met with accident.