BRANCH MANAGER ORIENTAL CO LTD Vs. KUNTI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the appellant-Insurance Company is directed against the judgment and award dated 18-7-2006 passed by Motor Vehicle Accident claims Tribunal, Palamau, Daltonganj in M. V. Case No. 9/2003, whereby he has and awarded a sum of Rs. 94,500/- to the claim ants for the death caused in a motor vehicle accident.

(2.) THE facts of the case lie in a narrow compass: on 14-10-2002 one Lalita Devi along with her son Manoj Kumar and other relatives were going on jeep No. CG 15-8526 to see the Durga Mandap during festival season. While those persons were moving on the vehicle, due to negligent driving, the vehicle fell down from the bridge, as a result of which Lalita Devi and Manoj Kumar died instantly at the spot receiving grievous in juries. The jeep was owned by respondent jagnarain Dixit, father-in-law of the deceased lalita Devi. The heirs of the deceased filed application for grant of compensation. The heirs of Lalita Devi filed M. V. Case No. 7/2003 whereas the heirs of Manoj Kumar filed M. V. Case No. 9/2003. The deceased manoj Kumar was aged about 20 years and said to be the only bread-earner in the family. On being noticed the appellant Insurance Company contested the case by filing written statement denying and disputing the liability of the Insurance Company. The Tribunal held that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the jeep. The tribunal further held that the insurance company is liable to pay the compensation amount.

(3.) MR. A. Alam, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant insurance company, assailed the impugned award as being contrary to law and the evidence available on record. Learned counsel firstly submitted that the vehicle was insured as a private vehicle and at the relevant time it was being used in violation of the contract of insurance policy. Learned counsel submitted that since the vehicle was being used at the relevant time by the persons other than the owner of the vehicle, the insurance company shall have no liability. Learned counsel further submitted that occupants of the vehicle were not covered under the policy in this connection reliance has been placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Meena Variya reported in AIR 2007 SC 1609 and in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Asha Rani and others reported in AIR 2002 SCW 5259 : (AIR 2003 SC 607 ).