ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. LALITA JHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal has been preferred by the appellant Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Muzaffarpur under section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment dated 14.1.2008 and award dated 28.1.2008 in Claim Case No. 260 of 2005, whereby the Additional District Judge-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, F.T.C. No. 5, Muzaffarpur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Claims Tribunal') has awarded total compensation amount of Rs. 18,08,738, which was directed to be equally shared by the appellant Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. as well as National Insurance Co. Ltd., which was arrayed as opposite party No. 2 in the claim case.

(2.) THE short fact of the case is that on 26.7.2007 a claim petition was filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 before the Claims Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs. 26,16,857 due to untoward accidental death of husband of respondent No. 1 and father of respondent No. 2. Death in the accident had occurred on 28.6.2005 near Ghenghata Mela, on NH 19 under Chapra Muffasil in the District of Saran. The husband of claimant-respondent No. 1 was the Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Muzaffarpur and while he was going along with one Ramadhar Prasad in a car bearing registration No. BR 06-F 6112 to Chapra, their car was dashed with a tanker, bearing registration No. NL 01-D 0645 due to rash and negligent driving of the tanker. After sustaining injury, the injured Bhavnath Jha was firstly taken to a private hospital at Patna and thereafter, he was carried to All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi. However, on 14.8.2005, he succumbed to the injuries. In respect of alleged occurrence, an F.I.R. vide Chapra Muffasil P.S. Case No. 168 of 2005 was registered and after investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the driver of the tanker in question. Further case of the claimants was that in the accident, the driver of the car, namely, Amarjit Kumar Prajapati, who was carrying valid licence, also died. In support of the claim, the claimants examined number of witnesses and brought on record number of documents. The Claims Tribunal framed the following issues:

(3.) IT is pertinent to mention here that National Insurance Co. Ltd. has not questioned the order passed by the Claims Tribunal. However, the appellant has come before this court challenging the impugned order, whereby the appellant was directed to share equally, meaning thereby that the appellant was directed to pay 50 per cent of the compensation amount to the claimants.