Jharkhand High Court
National Insurance Company Ltd vs Smt.Shazia Shamim & Ors on 29 October, 2013
Author: D.N.Upadhyay
Bench: D.N.Upadhyay
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Misc Appeal No. 83 of 2010
National Insurance Co. Ltd .... Appellant
Versus
1. Smt Shazia Shamim
2. Aamir Imam
3. Nazma Khatoon
4. Md Zafar Imam
5. Charajnit Singh
6. Jagbinder Singh @ Billu Singh ... Respondents
Coram : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY
For the petitioner/ appellant (s): Mr.G.C.Jha
For the respondents no. 1,3 and 4 : Mr. A.K. Das
29.10.2013This appeal has been preferred by the National Insurance Company Ltd. against the judgment & award dated 12.11.2009 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, FTC III cum Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jamshedpur , in connection with compensation case no. 74 of 2008 whereby the claimants/ respondents have been directed to be paid a sum of Rs. 12,86,000/- with interest at the rate of six per cent to be calculated from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e. 11.8.2008.
2 Facts of the case in brief is that the deceased with pillion rider was going on his motor cycle bearing registration No. JH 05D 8979. In the meantime, the motor cycle was dashed by truck bearing registration no. JH 37B 3091 as a result of which the deceased sustained injuries and died. The claimants who are wife, children and parents of the deceased, have filed application for grant of compensation which was allowed as aforesaid. 3 it is submitted that the claimants have not impleaded the owner and the insurer of the said motor cycle bearing registration no. JH 05D 8979. As a matter of fact, it was a case of contributory negligence and therefore compensation amount should have been distributed between the insurer of the offending motor cycle as well as the truck involved in the accident. Further more, contradictory statement with regard to the income of the deceased has come in evidence and the tribunal has taken higher side of income of the deceased as adduced by one of the claimant who is wife of the deceased. Since these issues have not been taken into consideration, the impugned judgment and order surfers from illegality and is liable to be set aside.
4 Learned counsel for the respondent claimants has vehemently opposed the arguments and submitted that it was not a case of contributory negligence; rather the offending truck bearing registration no. JH 37B 3091 being driven rashly and negligently caused dash to the motorcycle resulting in the death of the deceased and causing injuries to the pillion rider. The claimants have examined the eye witnesses who have clearly deposed that there was negligence on the part of the driver of the offending truck which caused the accident. I find that the insurance company has not led evidence to the effect that the deceased was driving the motor cycle negligently and was liable for such negligent act. The facts appearing in this case is covered by the judgment reported in 2012 (2) SCC 356 ( National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Sinitha & Ors ).
5 Learned counsel has referred to para 39 and 40 of the said judgment. Further more, it is argued that the tribunal has relied on Ext 1 and 2 to come to the conclusion with regard to the monthly income of the deceased who was a teacher in a Government School. The documents relating to his salary have been proved and marked as Ext. 1 and 2. There is no merit in this appeal and the tribunal has rightly passed the impugned award. 6 Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the impugned judgment as well as the judgment cited by the respondent claimants, it appears that the Insurance Company has not adduced any evidence to bring on record that the deceased was also negligent and he is also responsible for the accident and therefore the facts appearing in this case is covered by the judgment reported in 2012(2) SCC 356 (supra). Discussions made in para 12 and 15 of the impugned judgment clearly indicates that the tribunal has considered the arguments and evidence on record to come to a conclusion in respect of the monthly income of the deceased. 7 In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent claimants and the judgment cited, I do not find any merit in this appeal which is fit to be dismissed. 8 For the reasons aforesaid, this appeal is dismissed. The appellant insurance company is directed to deposit the awarded amount with interest to be paid by way of cheque drawn in favour of the claimants on or before 20.11.2013. The cheque shall be deposited with the Secretary, Jharkhand High Court Legal Services Committee on or before 20th November, 2013, so that the cheque may be given to the claimants in the Lok Adalat scheduled to be held on 23.11.2013.
Learned counsel for the claimant respondents is directed to communicate this order, so that they may remain present in the Lok Adalat to receive the amount of compensation.
Ambastha/- ( D.N.Upadhyay,J.)