H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance ... vs Bheeseham Pal And 4 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 8049 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 9
 

 
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 33 of 2018
 
Appellant :- H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd.
 
Respondent :- Bheeseham Pal And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Pawan Kumar Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

List has been revised. Sri Pawan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant is present. No one is present on behalf of respondents.

This first appeal from orders has been filed by appellant-insurance company against the judgment and award dated 19.09.2017, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal / Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Firozabad, in M.A.C.P. No. 100 of 2014 (Bheesham Pal and others vs. H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company Limited and two others), by which the claim petition filed by the claimants-respondents no. 1 to 3 was partly allowed and compensations of Rs. 4,34,000/- along with 7% interest has been awarded to the claimants-respondents on account of death of Sarita in a road accident, which was occurred on 03.07.2013.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the involvement of the insured vehicle in the alleged accident was not proved and it is a case of false implication of the insured vehicle. It is further submitted that the first information report was lodged against the insured vehicle, whereas, the Investigating Officer after due investigation has submitted final report to the effect that the insured vehicle was not involved in the alleged accident.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. Record shows that the claimant-respondent no. 1 namely Bheeseham Pal himself was appeared as PW-1 and had also produced certified copy of statement of eye witness Akhilesh, who had stated that the accident was occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the insured vehicle.

The Claims Tribunal while deciding issues nos. 1, 2 and 3 has recorded the finding that the driver of the insured vehicle was rash and negligent and was responsible for the accident and the finding recorded by Clams Tribunal in respect of rash and negligent driving of driver of the insured vehicle is based on material evidence available on record and hence, there is no perversity in the impugned order.

So far as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the Claims Tribunal had awarded Rs. 4,34,000/- as compensation for the death of young lady of 28 years old, which can not said to be excessive in any manner, rather it is in lower side.

In view of above, no grounds of interference is made out. The appeal is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed.

The appeal is dismissed.

Interim order, if any, stands discharged.

The statutory deposit of Rs. 25,000/- shall be remitted to the claims Tribunal for adjustment to the amount deposited by the appellant.

Order Date :- 26.7.2022

sailesh