Allahabad High Court
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. ... vs Smt. Narvada And 3 Others on 10 August, 2022
Bench: Vipin Chandra Dixit
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 9
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 3950 of 2017
Appellant :- The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru Dy. Manager
Respondent :- Smt. Narvada And 3 Others
Counsel for Appellant :- Sushil Kumar Mehrotra
Counsel for Respondent :- Mohd. Akbar Shah Alam Khan,Satya Deo Ojha
Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.
Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Mehrotra, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri S.D. Ojha, learned counsel appearing for claimants-respondent Nos. 1 and 2. No one is present for respondent nos.3 and 4.
This first appeal from order has been filed by the appellant-Insurance Company against the judgment and award dated 31.3.2016 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.6, Muzaffar Nagar in M.A.C.P. No.474 of 2015 (Smt.Narvada and another vs. Vipin Kumar and others) by which the claim petition filed by claimants-respondents was partly allowed and compensation of Rs.4,76,000/- alongwith 7% interest has been awarded to the claimants on account of death of Arvind who died in a road accident occurred on 17.1.2015.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the claimants had failed to prove the involvement of the truck in the accident, which was insured with the appellant- Insurance Company. It is further submitted that the insured vehicle was planted only to get compensation. The FIR was lodged after 27 days of the accident against unknown vehicle and the Claim Tribunal has erred in fixing liability upon the appellant-Insurance Company being insurer of the truck no. UP 12 T 1205.
On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for claimants-respondents has submitted that the claimants had fully proved the involvement of the truck as well as rash and negligent driving of the truck driver. The Investigating Officer investigated the case and submitted charge-sheet against the driver of the truck. The claimants had also produced two eye-witnesses namely Ishtkar P.W.2 and Nitin Kumar, P.W.3 who arrived at the place of occurrence at the time of accident. Both of them had fully proved the rash and negligent driving of the truck driver.
Considered the rival submission of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Record shows that the Investigating Officer had submitted charge-sheet against the driver of the Insured truck and eye-witnesses namely, Ishtkar P.W.2 and Nitin Kumar, P.W.3 had also proved rash and negligent driving of driver of insured truck whereas no evidence was led by the Insurance Company in rebuttal and even driver of the insured truck was not produced before the Claims Tribunal.
The finding of fact recorded by the Claim Tribunal while deciding issue no.1 regarding rash and negligent driving of driver of the insured truck is based on evidence and material which are available on record and there is no illegality in any manner. The compensation awarded by the Claim Tribunal is also just and proper and it cannot be said to be excessive. No ground for interference is made out.
The instant First Appeal From Order is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 10.8.2022
P.P.
