Gujarat High Court
Chauhan Shardadevi Wd/O Hareshkumar ... vs Agariya Haidar Sabdar Ali on 2 February, 2023
Author: Vaibhavi D. Nanavati
Bench: Vaibhavi D. Nanavati
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1239 of 2019
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI
===================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be NO
allowed to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair NO
copy of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question NO
of law as to the interpretation of the
Constitution of India or any order made
thereunder ?
===================================================
CHAUHAN SHARDADEVI WD/O HARESHKUMAR GANESHJI & 5
other(s)
Versus
AGARIYA HAIDAR SABDAR ALI & 2 other(s)
===================================================
Appearance:
MR R.K.MANSURI(3205) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6
MR. BHAVIN THAKAR, FOR MAULIK J SHELAT(2500) for the
Defendant(s) No. 3
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
NOTICE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
===================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI
Page 1 of 20
Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023
undefined
Date : 02/02/2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. By way of the present Appeal, the appellants herein is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 26.12.2017 passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (Main) Arvalli at Modasa in M.A.C.P. No. 773 of 2015 (Old No. 418 of 2013). The said order passed by the Tribunal reads thus:
"ORDER
1. The above referred claim petition is partly allowed.
2. The claimants are entitled to recover Rs. 9,06,300/- (Rupees Nine Lac Six Thousand and Three Hundred only) from the opponent no.1 and 2, jointly and severally with the proportionate cost and with interest at the rate of 9 % per annum, from the date of the claim petitions till realization:
3. The opponent no.3 is hereby exonerated.
4. The opponent no.1 and 2 are hereby directed to deposit awarded amount within 30 days of the order.
5. Deficit court fees stamp, if any, be recovered from the awarded amount and interim amount if paid be adjusted.
6. From the remaining amount, same shall be paid to the applicants, out of which, 30% amount be paid to the applicant No. 1, 20%-20% amount be paid to the applicant No.5 and 6 and 10%-10% amount be paid to the minor applicant No.2, 3 and 4.
7. The entire amount coming to share of the minor petitioners No. 2, 3 and 4 be invested in any Nationalized Page 2 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined Bank in Fixed Deposit for a period till the minor attain the age of majority.
8. Thereafter, amount coming to the share of the claimants No.1, 5 and 6, 70% amount be invested as fixed deposit in any nationalized bank for initial period of five years. The remaining 30% amount be paid to the applicants No. 1, 5 & 6 by account payee cheque/s forthwith.
9. The petitioner will not be entitled to get any loan, advance or withdrawal or can create any in encumbrances on the aforesaid fixed deposit receipt without prior permission of this Tribunal. However periodical interest accrued from time to time on the fixed deposits be paid to claimant.
10. Award be drawn accordingly in the above petition.
Signed and pronounced in the open Court today."
2. Brief facts of the present case are that, on 20.04.2013, the deceased was going towards Village: Shamlaji from Asal on motorcycle of opponent no.1, bearing registration No. GJ-9-VF-3963. It is further the case of the claimants that the opponent no.1 was riding the said motorcycle and deceased was pillion rider on the said motorcycle. It is further the case of the claimants that the opponent no.1, was riding the said motorcycle, in a rash and negligent manner and endangering to human life and when they were passing through the place of accident i.e. near outskirt of Village: Rudardi, Shamlaji - Himmatnagar National Highway, the opponent no.1, lost control over the Page 3 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined steering, and therefore, his motorcycle slept as a result accident occurred in which deceased sustained serious injuries and died during the treatment. It is further the case of the claimant that due to the sole negligence of opponent no.1, accident took place.
3. The appellants - original claimants, being aggrieved by the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, approached this Court by way of present First Appeal.
4. Heard Mr. R.K. Mansuri, learned advocate appearing for the appellants - claimants and Mr. Bhavin Thakar, learned advocate for Mr. Maulik J. Shelat, learned advocate appearing for the respondent- Insurance Company.
5.1. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order as referred above dated 26.12.2017, the appellants herein -
original claimants have approached this Court on the ground that, the respondent no.3 - Insurance Company is exonerated on the ground that the risk of pillion rider is not covered as per the policy. It was submitted by Mr. Mansuri, learned advocate that the said policy is a 'package policy' and placing reliance on the Page 4 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined same, it was submitted that the risk of pillion rider accordingly would be covered in such policy. The said policy is duly produced at Exh.26.
5.2. Mr. Mansuri, learned advocate submitted that it is a comprehensive / package policy. It was submitted that the aforesaid was not disputed by the respondent - Insurance Company also before the Court below. The policy which is duly produced at Exh.26 being a comprehensive /package policy, the risk of the pillion rider is also covered in basic premium and pillion rider is considered to be a third party, for the reason that the motorcycle is a private vehicle.
5.3. Mr. Mansuri, learned advocate also placed reliance on the Circular dated 02.06.1986 issued by the Tariff Advisory Committee, wherein, it was decided that the standard motor cycle / vehicle comprehensive policy should cover liability to pillion passenger treating them as occupants in the motorcycle. It was further submitted by Mr. Mansuri, learned advocate appearing for the appellants - claimants that as per the IRDA/NL/ CIR/F & U/073/11/2009 dated 16.11.2009, it is clear that the Page 5 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined insured liability in respect of occupant/s carried in a private car and pillion rider carried on two-wheeler is covered under the standard motor package policy. The Insurance Company is therefore liable to pay the compensation and the Tribunal has erred in exonerating the Insurance Company.
5.4. Mr. Mansuri, learned advocate also submitted that the consortium that is awarded by the Court below is Rs.40,000/-, and therefore, the same is required to be enhanced for the reason that there are other six dependents as referred in the cause-title and accordingly, the consortium is required to be enhanced to total Rs.2,40,000/- (Rs.40,000/- has already been granted by the Tribunal).
6.1. Per contra, Mr. Bhavin Thakar, learned advocate for Mr. Maulik Shelat, learned advocate appearing for the respondent-Insurance Company was not in a position to controvert the submissions made by Mr. Mansuri, learned advocate appearing for the appellants - claimants Page 6 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined 7.1. At this stage, it is apposite to refer to the decision in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. v/s. Balakrishnan and Anr. reported in 2012 (3) GLH 748, relevant paras: 15 to 21 reads thus:
"15. At this juncture, we may refer with profit to a two- Judge Bench decision in Bhagyalakshmi and others v. United Insurance Company Limited and another[11] wherein the learned Judges took note of the contention of the learned senior counsel for the claimant-appellant which was to the effect that after the deletion of the second proviso appended to Section 95(1)(b) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 in the 1988 Act, the liability of a passenger in a private vehicle must also be included in the policy in terms of the provisions of the 1988 Act. The Bench reproduced the policy, referred to Section 64-B of the Insurance Act, 1938, took note of the role of the Tariff Advisory Committee and referred to the decisions in Amrit Lal Sood and Another v. Kaushalya Devi Thapar and Others[12], Asha Rani (supra), Tilak Singh (supra), Jhuma Saha (supra) and Sudhakaran K. V. and Others (supra) and observed thus :-
"Before this Court, however, the nature of policies which came up for consideration were Act policies. This Court did not deal with a package policy. If the Tariff Advisory Committee seeks to enforce its decision in regard to coverage of third-party risk which would include all persons including occupants of the vehicle and the insurer having entered into a contract of insurance in relation thereto, we are of the opinion that the matter may require a deeper scrutiny." On a perusal of the aforesaid paragraph, it is clear as crystal that the decisions that have been referred to in Bhagyalakshmi (supra) involved only "Act Policies". The Bench felt that the matter would be different if the Tariff Advisory Committee seeks to enforce its decision in regard to coverage of third party risk which would include an occupant in a vehicle.
It is worth noting that the Bench referred to certain decisions of Delhi High Court and Madras High Court and thought it Page 7 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined appropriate to refer the matter to a larger Bench. Be it noted, in the said case, the Court was dealing with comprehensive policy which is also called a package policy. In that context, in the earlier part of the judgment, the Bench had stated thus:-
"The policy in question is a package policy. The contract of insurance if given its face value covers the risk not only of a third party but also of persons travelling in the car including the owner thereof. The question is as to whether the policy in question is a comprehensive policy or only an Act policy."
16. Thus, it is quite vivid that the Bench had made a distinction between the "Act policy" and "comprehensive policy/package policy". We respectfully concur with the said distinction. The crux of the matter is what would be the liability of the insurer if the policy is a "comprehensive/package policy". We are absolutely conscious that the matter has been referred to a larger Bench, but, as is evident, the Bench has also observed that it would depend upon the view of the Tariff Advisory Committee pertaining to enforcement of its decision to cover the liability of an occupant in a vehicle in a "comprehensive/package policy"
regard being had to the contract of insurance.
17. At this stage, it is apposite to note that when the decision in Bhagyalakshmi (supra) was rendered, a decision of High Court of Delhi dealing with the view of the Tariff Advisory Committee in respect of "comprehensive/package policy" had not come into the field. We think it apt to refer to the same as it deals with certain factual position which can be of assistance. The High Court of Delhi in Yashpal Luthra and Anr. V. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Another[13], after recording the evidence of the competent authority of Tariff Advisory Committee (TAC) and Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA), reproduced a circular dated 16.11.2009 issued by IRDA to CEOs of all the Insurance Companies restating the factual position relating to the liability of Insurance companies in respect of a pillion rider on a two-wheeler and occupants in a private car under the comprehensive/package policy. The relevant portion of the circular which has been reproduced by the High Court is as follows:-
Page 8 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined "IRDA Ref: IRDA/NL/CIR/F&U/073/11/2009 16.11.2009 To CEOs of all general insurance companies Re: Liability of insurance companies in respect of occupants of a Private car and pillion rider on a two-wheeler under Standard Motor Package Policy (also called Comprehensive Policy).
Insurers' attention is drawn to wordings of Section (II) 1 (ii) of Standard Motor Package Policy (also called Comprehensive Policy) for private car and two-wheeler under the (erstwhile) India Motor Tariff. For convenience the relevant provisions are reproduced hereunder:-
'Section II - Liability to Third Parties
1. Subject to the limits of liabilities as laid down in the Schedule hereto the company will indemnify the insured in the event of an accident caused by or arising out of the use of the insured vehicle against all sums which the insured shall become legally liable to pay in respect of -
(i) death or bodily injury to any person including occupants carried in the vehicle (provided such occupants are not carried for hire or reward) but except so far as it is necessary to meet the requirements of Motor Vehicles Act, the Company shall not be liable where such death or injury arises out of and in the course of employment of such person by the insured.' It is further brought to the attention of insurers that the above provisions are in line with the following circulars earlier issued by the TAC on the subject:
(i) Circular M.V. No. l of 1978 - dated 18th March, 1978 (regarding occupants carried in Private Car) effective from 25th March, 1977.
(ii) MOT/GEN/10 dated 2nd June, 1986 (regarding pillion riders in a two-wheeler) effective from the date of the circular.
The above circulars make it clear that the insured liability in respect of occupant(s) carried in a private car and pillion rider carried on two-wheeler is covered under the Standard Motor Package Policy. A copy each of the above circulars is enclosed for ready reference.
Page 9 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined The Authority vide circular No. 066/IRDA/F&U/Mar-08 dated March 26, 2008 issued under File & Use Guidelines has reiterated that pending further orders the insurers shall not vary the coverage, terms and conditions wording, warranties, clauses and endorsements in respect of covers that were under the erstwhile tariffs. Further the Authority, vide circular No. 019/IRDA/NL/F&U/Oct-08 dated November 6, 2008 has mandated that insurers are not permitted to abridge the scope of standard covers available under the erstwhile tariffs beyond the options permitted in the erstwhile tariffs. All general insurers are advised to adhere to the afore- mentioned circulars and any non- compliance of the same would be viewed seriously by the Authority. This is issued with the approval of competent authority.
Sd/-
(Prabodh Chander) Executive Director" [emphasis supplied]
18. The High Court has also reproduced a circular issued by IRD dated 3.12.2009. It is instructive to quote the same:-
"IRDA IRDA/NL/CIR/F&U/078/12/2009 3.12.2009.
To All CEOs of All general insurance companies (except ECGC, AIC, Staff Health, Apollo) Re: Liability of insurance companies in respect of occupant of a private car and pillion rider in a two-wheeler under Standard Motor Package Policy (also called Comprehensive Policy).
Pursuant to the Order of the Delhi High Court dated 23.11.2009 in MAC APP No. 176/2009 in the case of Yashpal Luthra v. United India and Ors., the Authority convened a meeting on November 26, 2009 of the CEOs of all the general insurance companies doing motor insurance business in the presence of the counsel appearing on behalf of the Authority and the leaned amicus curie.
Based on the unanimous decision taken in the meeting by the representatives of the general insurance companies to comply with the IRDA circular dated 16th November, 2009 restating the position relating to the liability of all the general insurance companies doing motor insurance business in respect of the occupants in a private car and pillion rider on a two wheeler under the comprehensive/package policies Page 10 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined which was communicated to the court on the same day i.e. November 26, 2009 and the court was pleased to pass the order (dt. 26.11.2009) received from the Court Master, Delhi High Court, is enclosed for your ready reference and adherence. In terms of the said order and the admitted liability of all the general insurance companies doing motor insurance business in respect of the occupants in a private car and pillion rider on a two-wheeler under the comprehensive/package policies, you are advised to confirm to the Authority, strict compliance of the circular dated 16th November, 2009 and orders dt. 26.11.2009 of the High Court. Such compliance on your part would also involve:
i) withdrawing the plea against such a contest wherever taken in the cases pending before the MACT, and issue appropriate instructions to their respective lawyers and the operating officers within 7 days;
ii) with respect to all appeals pending before the High Courts on this point, issuing instructions within 7 days to the respective operating officers and the counsel to withdraw the contest on this ground which would require identification of the number of appeals pending before the High Courts (whether filed by the claimants or the insurers) on this issue within a period of 2 weeks and the contest on this ground being withdrawn within a period of four weeks thereafter;
iii) With respect to the appeals pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court, informing, within a period of 7 days, their respective advocates on record about the IRDA Circulars, for appropriate advice and action. Your attention is also drawn to the discussions in the CEOs meeting on 26.11.2009, when it was reiterated that insurers must take immediate steps to collect statistics about accident claims on the above subject through a central point of reference decided by them as the same has to be communicated in due course to the Honourable High Court. You are therefore advised to take up the exercise of collecting and collating the information within a period of two months to ensure necessary & effective compliance of the order of the Court. The information may be centralized with the Secretariat of the General Insurance Council and also furnished to us.Page 11 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined IRDA requires a written confirmation from you on the action taken by you in this regard.
This has the approval of the Competent Authority.
Sd/-
(Prabodh Chander) Executive Director" [emphasis added]
19. It is extremely important to note here that till 31st December, 2006 the Tariff Advisory Committee and, thereafter, from 1st January, 2007, IRDA functioned as the statutory regulatory authorities and they are entitled to fix the tariff as well as the terms and conditions of the policies by all insurance companies. The High Court had issued notice to the Tariff Advisory Committee and the IRDA to explain the factual position as regards the liability of the insurance companies in respect of an occupant in a private car under the "comprehensive/ package policy". Before the High Court, the Competent Authority of IRDA had stated that on 2nd June, 1986, the Tariff Advisory Committee had issued instructions to all the insurance companies to cover the pillion rider of a scooter/motorcycle under the "comprehensive policy" and the said position continues to be in vogue till date. It had also admitted that the "comprehensive policy" is presently called a "package policy". It is the admitted position, as the decision would show, the earlier circulars dated 18th March, 1978 and 2nd June, 1986 continue to be valid and effective and all insurance companies are bound to pay the compensation in respect of the liability towards an occupant in a car under the "comprehensive/package policy" irrespective of the terms and conditions contained in the policy. The competent authority of the IRDA was also examined before the High Court who stated that the circulars dated 18th March, 1978 and 2nd June, 1986 of the Tariff Advisory Committee were incorporated in the Indian Motor Tariff effective from 1st July, 2002 and they continue to be operative and binding on the insurance companies. Because of the aforesaid factual position, the circulars dated 16th November 2009 and 3rd December, 2009, that have been reproduced hereinabove, were issued.
Page 12 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined
20. It is also worthy to note that the High Court, after referring to individual circulars issued by various insurance companies, eventually stated thus:-
"In view of the aforesaid, it is clear that the comprehensive/ package policy of a two wheeler covers a pillion rider and comprehensive/package policy of a private car covers the occupants and where the vehicle is covered under a comprehensive/package policy, there is no need for Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to go into the question whether the Insurance Company is liable to compensate for the death or injury of a pillion rider on a two-wheeler or the occupants in a private car. In fact, in view of the TAC's directives and those of the IRDA, such a plea was not permissible and ought not to have been raised as, for instance, it was done in the present case."
21. In view of the aforesaid factual position, there is no scintilla of doubt that a "comprehensive/package policy"
would cover the liability of the insurer for payment of compensation for the occupant in a car. There is no cavil that an "Act Policy" stands on a different footing from a "Comprehensive/Package Policy". As the circulars have made the position very clear and the IRDA, which is presently the statutory authority, has commanded the insurance companies stating that a "Comprehensive/Package Policy" covers the liability, there cannot be any dispute in that regard. We may hasten to clarify that the earlier pronouncements were rendered in respect of the "Act Policy" which admittedly cannot cover a third party risk of an occupant in a car. But, if the policy is a "Comprehensive/Package Policy", the liability would be covered. These aspects were not noticed in the case of Bhagyalakshmi (supra) and, therefore, the matter was referred to a larger Bench. We are disposed to think that there is no necessity to refer the present matter to a larger Bench as the IRDA, which is presently the statutory authority, has clarified the position by issuing circulars which have been reproduced in the judgment by the Delhi High Court and we have also reproduced the same."
7.2. At this stage, it is apposite to refer to the ratio laid Page 13 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur & Ors., reported in (2021) 11 SCC 780, wherein it was held as under:
"29. Loss of Consortium, in legal parlance, was historically given a narrow meaning to be awarded only to the spouse i.e. the right of the spouse to the company, care, help, comfort, guidance, society, solace, affection and sexual relations with his or her mate. The loss of companionship, love, care and protection, etc., the spouse is entitled to get, has to be compensated appropriately. The concept of non- pecuniary damage for loss of consortium is one of the major heads for awarding compensation in various jurisdictions such as the United States of America, Australia, etc. English courts have recognised the right of a spouse to get compensation even during the period of temporary disablement.
30. In Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram, this Court interpreted "consortium" to be a compendious term, which encompasses spousal consortium, parental consortium, as well as filial consortium. The right to consortium would include the company, care, help, comfort, guidance, solace and affection of the deceased, which is a loss to his family. With respect to a spouse, it would include sexual relations with the deceased spouse.
31. Parental consortium is granted to the child upon the premature death of a parent, for loss of parental aid, protection, affection, society, discipline, guidance and training. Filial consortium is the right of the parents to compensation in the case of an accidental death of a child. An accident leading to the death of a child causes great shock and agony to the parents and family of the deceased. The greatest agony for a parent is to lose their Page 14 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined child during their lifetime. Children are valued for their love and affection, and their role in the family unit.
32. Modern jurisdictions world-over have recognized that the value of a child's consortium far exceeds the economic value of the compensation awarded in the case of the death of a child. Most jurisdictions permit parents to be awarded compensation under loss of consortium on the death of a child. The amount awarded to the parents is the compensation for loss of love and affection, care and companionship of the deceased child.
33. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is a beneficial legislation which has been framed with the object of providing relief to the victims, or their families, in cases of genuine claims. In case where a parent has lost their minor child, or unmarried son or daughter, the parents are entitled to be awarded loss of consortium under the head of Filial Consortium. Parental Consortium is awarded to the children who lose the care and protection of their parents in motor vehicle accidents. The amount to be awarded for loss consortium will be as per the amount fixed in Pranay Sethi (supra).
34. At this stage, we consider it necessary to provide uniformity with respect to the grant of consortium, and loss of love and affection. Several Tribunals and High Courts have been awarding compensation for both loss of consortium and loss of love and affection. The Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi (supra), has recognized only three conventional heads under which compensation can be awarded viz. loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses. In Magma General (supra), this Court gave a comprehensive interpretation to consortium to include spousal consortium, parental consortium, as well as filial consortium. Loss of love and affection is comprehended in loss of consortium.
35. The Tribunals and High Courts are directed to award compensation for loss of consortium, which is a Page 15 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined legitimate conventional head. There is no justification to award compensation towards loss of love and affection as a separate head."
8. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.
9. The submissions advanced by Mr. Mansuri, learned advocate appearing for the appellants - claimants require consideration.
10. This Court has also gone through Exh.26 which is duly produced on record and considering the said policy, the premium as deposited by the claimants, the policy being a comprehensive policy, the risk of pillion rider is covered in basic premium and in the facts of the present case, the appellants being a third party - pillion rider, the said risk would be covered by the said policy as referred above, and therefore, the insurance company is liable to pay the compensation. The consortium is required to be enhanced to the tune of Rs.2,40,000/- (Rs.40,000/- has already been granted by the Tribunal).
Page 16 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined
11. This Court has gone through the documentary evidence produced on record, which is forming part of the paper-
book, position of law as referred above as well as the submissions advanced by the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considering the same, following order is passed:
A. The Insurance Company shall deposit the amount of compensation amounting to Rs.11,06,300/-, if the same is not deposited before the Tribunal within eight weeks from the date of the receipt of the copy of the order. Once the said amount is deposited, the Tribunal after due verification, 30% of the amount be paid to the appellant No.1, 20%-20% amount be paid to the appellant Nos. 5 and 6 and 10-10% amount be paid to the minor appellant nos. 2, 3 and 4. The entire amount which would be in the share of minor appellant nos. 2, 3 and 4 be invested in any Nationalized Bank in Fixed Deposit for a period till the minor attain the age of majority.
12. This Court enhanced the amount under the following heads:-
Page 17 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined Particulars Amount Consortium Rs.2,40,000/-
(Rs.40,000/- has already been granted by the Tribunal, Rs.2,00,000/- has been enhanced) Total Rs.11,06,300/-
Compensation awarded (-) Rs.9,06,300/-
Amount to be enhanced Rs.2,00,000/-/-
12.1. Considering the aforesaid, in the facts of the present case, the compensation is enhanced by Rs.2,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. The judgment and decree passed by the Tribunal is required to be modified to the aforesaid extent. Rest of the order / judgment, in view of this Court requires no interference.
13. For the foregoing reasons, the following order is passed:-
(i) Appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) judgment and order dated 26.12.2017 passed by the
Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (Main) Arvalli at Modasa in M.A.C.P. No. 773 of 2015 (Old No. 418 of 2013) is hereby modified and in addition to what has been awarded by the Page 18 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined Tribunal, a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as additional amount i.e. total Rs. 11,06,300/- (Rs.9,06,300/- already awarded by the Tribunal) with interest at the rate of 6% per annum is awarded, which shall be from the date of filing claim petition till date of its realization.
(iii) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation i.e. Rs.11,06,300/- with 6% p.a. interest as early as possible within an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
(iv) The apportionment and order for disbursement as made by the Tribunal in the operative portion of the order shall hold good for the additional amount of compensation.
(v) After deposit of the amount of compensation, the same shall be disbursed in favour of the claimants through RTGS, after proper verification. The bank account details shall be furnished by the learned advocate for the claimants to the Nazir Department of the Court concerned. Once the Page 19 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1239/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/02/2023 undefined said amount is deposited, the Tribunal after due verification, 30% of the amount be paid to the appellant No.1, 20%-20% amount be paid to the appellant Nos. 5 and 6 and 10-10% amount be paid to the minor appellant nos.
2, 3 and 4. The entire amount which would be in the share of minor appellant nos. 2, 3 and 4 be invested in any Nationalized Bank in Fixed Deposit for a period till the minor attain the age of majority.
(vi) The appellants are directed to pay deficit court fees, if any, on the enhanced amount i.e. considering total amount within one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order / before awarding the enhanced compensation.
14. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Tribunal forthwith. Pending civil applications, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.
(VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI,J) Pradhyuman Page 20 of 20 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 21:25:58 IST 2023