Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. ... vs Smt. Pushpa Devi And 6 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 15243 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. ... vs Smt. Pushpa Devi And 6 Others on 2 May, 2024

Author: Vipin Chandra Dixit

Bench: Vipin Chandra Dixit

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:78668
 
Court No. - 9
 

 
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 720 of 2017
 

 
Appellant :- Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd.
 
Respondent :- Smt. Pushpa Devi And 6 Others
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Baleshwar Chaturvedi
 

 
Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.
 

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Vashisth Tiwari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos.1 to 5. No one is present on behalf of respondent nos. 6 & 7. Perused the record.

This FAFO has been filed by the appellant under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the judgment and award dated 5.12.2016 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.2, Gorakhpur in MACP No. 5 of 2013 (Smt. Pushpa Devi and others vs. Rajni Kant Sharma and others), by which compensation of Rs.13,90,000/- alongiwth 7% annual simple interest has been awarded in favour of claimants on account of death of Krishna Prasad who died in road accident.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that it was a case of head-on collision in between two motorcycles. The deceased was driving motorcycle bearing No. UP 52 L 0594 which was hit by offending motorcycle bearing No.UP 53 AY 8122. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the accident was occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of both the motorcyclists and both are equally responsible for the accident. The Claims Tribunal has erred in deciding issue nos. 1 & 2 holding 75% negligence of insured motorcycle and only 25% has been deducted in terms of contributory negligence of the deceased.

On the other hand, learned counsel for claimants-respondents submits that the claimants had fully proved the rash and negligent driving of rider of insured motorcycle. The FIR was lodged against the rider of insured motorcycle and the Investigating Officer, after due investigation, has submitted charge sheet against the rider of insured motorcycle. Eye-witness Deen Dayal Mishra who appeared as P.W.2 has also stated on oath that the deceased was going by his motorcycle on extreme left side and the offending motorcyclist came on wrong side and hit the motorcycle of the deceased. The Claims Tribunal while deciding issue nos. 1 & 2 has recorded the finding while considering the site plan that the offending motorcycle came wrong side and hit the motorcycle of deceased.

Considered the rival submission of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The record shows that the charge sheet has been submitted by the Investigating Officer, after due investigation against the rider of insured motorcycle. The claimants had also produced Deen Dayal Mishra who was an eye witness as P.W.-2 and has also proved the rash and negligent driving of rider of insured motorcycle. The finding recorded by the Tribunal regarding negligence of rider of insured motorcycle to the extent of 75% does not warrant any interference and there is no illegality or infirmity in the judgment and order.

No other ground has been pressed by the learned counsel for the appellant. The FAFO is devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed.

Interim order, if any, stands discharged.

Order Date :- 2.5.2024

P.P.