Uttarakhand High Court
Mr. Prabhat Pande vs Hari Singh Rawat And Others on 8 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
AO No. 80 of 2010
National Insurance Company ................Appellant
Mr. Prabhat Pande, Adv. for the appellant
-versus-
Hari Singh Rawat and others
.........Respondents
Mr. D.C.S.Rawat, Advocate for the respondent
With
CROSA No. 08 of 2018
Smt. Mandodari Devi .................Appellant
Mr. D.C.S.Rawat, Adv. for the appellant
-versus-
National Insurance Company Ltd. and others
.........Respondents
Date of hearing and Judgement : 08.11.2021
Sri S.K.Mishra, J.
1. These two appeals arises out of a common judgment
and order passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal/District Judge, Pauri Gahrwal in Motor
Accident Claims Petition No. 103 of 2005, Hari Singh
& others vs. Rajendra Singh and another.
2. As preferred appeal no. 80 of 2010, the legal heirs of
the deceased being the private opposite parties,
were the claimants before the Tribunal. The
applications were filled under Section 166 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for compensation arising
out of the death of the deceased Surendra Singh
Rawat.
3. On the fateful day i.e. 04.09.2005, late Surendra
Singh Rawat was travelling in a vehicle No. U.P.06-
1753 from Chaurikhal to his place of working Khirsu.
It is alleged that during the travel, the driver drove
the vehicle very rash and negligent manner, hence,
near village Chhoya, it met with an accident and fell
into a gorge 150 meters below the road. The
deceased Surendra Singh Rawat suffered serious
injuries and he succumbed to the injuries in District
Hospital, Pauri Garhwal. It is also not disputed that
at the time of his death, he was aged about 22 years
old. The claimant claimed that Rs.5000/-per month
was his earning at the time of his death. He was
working as a muster roll employee of the Garhwal
Vikas Nigam Limited.
4. After taking the evidence, in this case, the learned
Judge Presiding the Tribunal allowed the application
and directed the insurer to pay a sum of Rs.
3,50,000/-. He took the age of the deceased to be 22
years and his monthly income to be 2,500/- per
month for the purpose of calculation of
compensation. However, the Tribunal decided that
1/3 should be reduced and also took into
consideration the multiplier of 17. He came to the
conclusion that amount to be of 3,40,000/-. The
Tribunal also awarded loss of estate, loss of
consortium and funeral expenses as 10,000/- and
directed that Rs. 3,50,000/- to be paid to the
petitioner by the Insurance Company as the vehicle
was ensured to the Insurance Company.
5. In assailing the findings recorded, the learned
Advocate appearing for the Insurance Company
submits that the documents produced before the
Court reveals that on the date of occurrence, the
driver Girish Chandra Rawat was not having a valid
licence in the sense that the occurrence took place
on 14.09.2005, whereas on that date there was no
renewal of the driving license of the driver Girish
Chandra Rawat. It was renewed on 30.09.2005.
Before that there was no renewal of the driving
license. It appears from the record that last renewal
of the driving license was on 29.09.1983. Thus, it is
contended that as the driver of the offending vehicle
had no valid driving license on the date of
occurrence, there was a violation of the terms and
conditions of the insurance policy issued in favour of
the owner of the vehicle. Hence, the Insurance
Company cannot be directed to indemnify the
claimant for the loss they have suffered because of
the death of the deceased.
6. None appears for the owner of the driver of the
vehicle though there has been sufficiency of notice to
him.
7. The learned counsel for the claimant/opposite party
who have preferred a counter appeal in this case,
also does not dispute the facts. Learned counsel
appearing for the claimant/appellant claims that the
amount of compensation has been granted less and
it should be considerably increased.
8. As per the documents 20 (ga), the monthly income
of the deceased is 2,500/- reducing it by 1/3 i.e.
800/- approximately, the contribution to the family
comes to about 1700/- per month, which result in
Rs. 20,400/- as annual contribution to the family.
This annual loss to the family of Rs. 20,400/- is
multiplied by 18, the resultant would be Rs.
3,66,200/-. Thus, 3,66,200/- is the compensation to
be paid to the appellant. In addition to the aforesaid
compensation, the claimants are entitled to
Rs. 20,000/- for loss of consortium, Rs. 75,000/- for
loss of estate and Rs. 10,000/- for funeral expenses,
which in total comes to Rs, 4,04,700/- rounded upto
4,10,000/-, out of which, Rs.3,50,000/- has already
been paid. Rest Rs. 60,000/- should be paid by the
Insurance Company within two months along with
the interest at the rate of 6 % from the date of filing
of the appeal i.e. 11.03.2010.
9. It is further directed that as there has been violation
of the policy conditions of the Insurance Policy, as
the offending driver had no valid driving license at
the relevant time, the insurance company should
have right to recover the same from the owner.
Accordingly, it is directed that the insurance
company shall recover the entire amount of Rs.
4,10,000/- along with interest which is paid to the
claimant by adopting appropriate proceedings for
execution.
10. Both the appeals are allowed in part.
11. There shall be no order as to costs.
12. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on
proper application.
(S.K.Mishra)
Judge
KKS
