ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. URMILA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this appeal, appellant/Insurance Company has challenged the award passed by the Court of learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Mandi, in MAC Petition No. 105/2005(87/2004), dated 08.06.2012, vide which learned Tribunal below awarded an amount of Rs. 3,06,000.00 as compensation to the claimants with interest @ 6 % per annum and fastened the liability to compensate the claimant upon the appellant/ Insurance Company.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present case are that one Pyar Chand, son of claimants No. 1 and 2 and brother of claimant No. 3 died in an accident near Chimpa-Ra-Riharu near Basahi Dhar at around 2:30 a.m. on the intervening night of 07.01.2003/08.01.2003. The offending vehicle bearing registration No. HP-02-8869 was owned by Brij Lal and was being driven by Onkar Sharma. Said vehicle was insured with appellant/Insurance Company. According to the claimants, deceased had boarded the Jeep bearing registration No. HP-02-8869 at Joginder Nagar on his way to his house at village Chimahnu, which met with an accident at a place known as Chimpa-Ra-Hiharu, at a distance of about two kilometers from Bashai on account of same being driven in a rash an negligent manner by driver Onkar Sharma. The ill fated Jeep rolled down 50 feet from the road in a ravine resulting in the death of Pyar Chand on the spot. As per the claimants, at the time of his death, the deceased was working as a Salesman in Bharat Stationers Shop at Joginder Nagar and was earning Rs. 8,000.00 per month including the income from other sources like agriculture etc. On these bases, they claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 8,00,000.00 with interest from the respondents.

(3.) The owner and driver of the vehicle in issue, who were respondents No. 1 and 2 before the learned Tribunal took the stand that the accident in fact occurred on account of failure of brake of the vehicle in question and not because of rash and negligent driving of the driver. It was further their stand that even otherwise the vehicle was duly insured with the Insurance Company.