Madhya Pradesh High Court
Laxminarayan Sharma (Deleted) Anil ... vs Darshan Lal Andors. on 8 December, 2025
Author: Hirdesh
Bench: Hirdesh
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:31876
1 MA-322-2005
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH
ON THE 8 th OF DECEMBER, 2025
MISC. APPEAL No. 322 of 2005
LAXMINARAYAN SHARMA (DELETED) ANIL SHARMA AND
OTHERS
Versus
DARSHAN LAL ANDORS.
Appearance:
Shri Jitendra Kumar Sharma - Senior Advocate with Ms.Krati Sachdev
-Advocate for legal heirs of appellant- owner.
Shri Arvind Kumar Agrawal- Advocate for respondent No.2-
Insurance Company.
ORDER
This misc appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act has been preferred by LRs of deceased-owner of offending vehicle against Award dated 21.12.2004 passed in Claim Case No.28/2003 by Additional Member of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sabalgarh, District Morena (hereinafter it would be referred to as "Claims Tribunal") exonerating Insurance Company from satisfying award amount and directed appellant for payment of compensation to claimant.
(2) Facts of case, in short, are that on 23rd June 2003 at about 2-30 p.m., claimant- respondent No.1 Darshan Lal was going on foot from village Rijhoni to Kailaras town. In mid-way, near village Torika, driver of tractor bearing No.MP 06 JA 8574, by moving vehicle rashly and negligently, Signature Not Verified Signed by: AVINASH BHARGAV Signing time: 10-Dec-25 10:24:29 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:31876 2 MA-322-2005 turned turtle due to which claimant was dashed with tractor and suffered grave injuries. FIR of accident was lodged by Mangilal, resident of village Karori upon which crime was registered against driver for commission of offence under Sections 304-A, 279 and 337 of IPC. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed against driver of offending vehicle involved in alleged accident. It was not disputed that offending tractor was owned by appellant and insured with Insurance Company. Claimant filed claim petition before Claims Tribunal under Section 166 of Act claiming compensation. Claims Tribunal after considering facts and evidence on record, awarded only Rs.25,000/- in favour of claimant, payable by owner and driver by exonerating Insurance Company from indemnifying award amount on behalf of owner, insured. Hence, this appeal.
(3) It is contended on behalf of legal heirs of appellant-original owner of offending vehicle that at time of accident, tractor was being driven by respondent No.3, who was having valid driving licence. Tractor involved in accident owned by original appellant (since deceased) was insured with Insurance Company. At relevant time, tractor was driving for transporting fodder for animals. It is submitted that there is no violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy, hence, Insurance Company by provision of law and contract of terms of policy, was liable to indemnify and satisfy award amount passed in favour of claimant. Learned counsel further relied on judgment passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in connected MA No.324/2005 Laxminarayan Sharma Vs. Smt. Mavita and Others (order dated 17.07.2013 Gwalior Bench) wherein Coordinate Bench of this Court Signature Not Verified Signed by: AVINASH BHARGAV Signing time: 10-Dec-25 10:24:29 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:31876 3 MA-322-2005 has held that Insurance Company was liable for indemnifying liability of payment of awarded amount to claimant(s) therein.
(4) On other hand, submission put forth by Insurance Company is that tractor-trolley involved in accident was engaged in marriage party which was in violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy and due to rash and negligent driving, alleged tractor-trolley turned turtle, as a result of which claimant got injured. It is submitted that documents such as FIR and spot- map produced before Claims Tribunal clearly show that marriage party was travelling in tractor-trolley, which turned turtle. In that view of matter, learned Claims Tribunal has rightly exonerated Insurance Company from its liability of indemnifying award on behalf of insured.
(5) Heard learned counsel for parties. Also perused evidence on record and law applicable case.
(6) Obviously, where an accident occurs owing to rash and negligent driving by driver of offending vehicle, resulting in sufferance of injury or death by any third party, driver would be liable to pay compensation therefor. Owner of vehicle in terms of Act also becomes liable under Act. In event vehicle is insured, which in case of a third party, having regard to sub- section (2) of section 147 of Act is mandatory in character, Insurance Company would statutorily be enjoined to indemnify owner.
(7) In view of submissions made by learned counsel on either side, now two questions that arise for consideration are:
''(i) Whether, in case of injury of a person as a third party by receiving dash on spot due to rash and negligent driving of tractor, Insurance Company Signature Not Verified Signed by: AVINASH BHARGAV Signing time: 10-Dec-25 10:24:29 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:31876
4 MA-322-2005 is statutorily liable to indemnify insured for payment of award amount to claimant;
(ii) Whether, in case of injury of a person while travelling with company of marriage party in a tractor-trolley as a result of rash and negligent driving of tractor-trolley, Insurance Company cannot be made liable to indemnify insured for payment of award amount to claimant.'' (8) Now, turning back to evidence of case, claimant Darshan Lal (AW-
1) deposed that he was going from Rijoni to Jaura. At that juncture, Kamlesh Dhakad by driving his tractor-trolley rashly from backside and it turned turtle. Due to which, Bhukhan was pressed under trolley and died on spot. He further deposed that due to alleged accident, he sustained injury in his left hand and ribs. Report of accident was lodged at Police Station Kailaras. He was admitted in Kailaras Hospital and from there, he was referred to Morena Hospital where he was further treated.
(9) NAW-1 Laxminarayan (since deceased- original appellant), owner of vehicle involved in accident, deposed that on date of accident his tractor- trolley was engaged in carrying wheat grain chaff of Pholwati of Kailaras. In mid-way, his tractor turned turtle. Claimant including Banti and Bukhan (deceased) who were passing nearby trolley came into contact. Witness denied that at time of accident, marriage party was travelling in his trolley attached with tractor.
(10) Defence of Insurance Company is that vehicle, at time of accident, was going against terms and conditions of insurance policy and due to rash and negligent driving on part of driver, it turned turtle and persons Signature Not Verified Signed by: AVINASH BHARGAV Signing time: 10-Dec-25 10:24:29 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:31876 5 MA-322-2005 who were travelling in trolley got injured, so in these circumstances, no liability can be fastened on Insurance Company to indemnify insured.
(11) There is nothing on record to show that at time of accident offending tractor-vehicle was being plied in violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy attached with tractor by carrying marriage party. In view of above, Insurance Company has been unable to prove its defence and failed to establish by placing some cogent material that injured/claimant was not a pedestrian but was travelling with marriage party against terms and conditions of insurance policy and died due to rash and negligent driving on part of driver of offending vehicle. That being so, Insurance Company is under legal and contractual liability to indemnify insured for payment of award amount to claimant. There is further statutory liability envisaged in Section 147 of Act upon Insurance Company to indemnify insured for payment of compensation to claimant.
(12) In this view of the matter as well as the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in connected MA No.324/2005 Laxminarayan Sharma Vs. Smt. Mavita and Others (order dated 17.07.2013 Gwalior Bench) regarding same alleged motor accident, the findings of learned Claims Tribunal in exonerating Insurance Company are not sustainable in law and deserve to be set aside.
(13) Consequently, by allowing appeal filed by legal representatives of original owner of offending vehicle (since deceased) owner, award under appeal is set aside to extent of liability of payment by owner. Insurance Company being held liable for indemnifying liability of payment of awarded Signature Not Verified Signed by: AVINASH BHARGAV Signing time: 10-Dec-25 10:24:29 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:31876 6 MA-322-2005 amount to claimant is hereby directed to make payment of compensation as directed above to claimant within a period of three months from this order.
(14) Accordingly, this misc. appeal stands disposed of.
(HIRDESH) JUDGE *AVI* Signature Not Verified Signed by: AVINASH BHARGAV Signing time: 10-Dec-25 10:24:29 AM