NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. TSEWANG DORJAY
LAWS(J&K)-2020-6-7
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Decided on June 19,2020

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Appellant
VERSUS
Tsewang Dorjay Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. BALJIT KAUR [REFERRED TO]
MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD VS. SAJU P. PAUL [REFERRED TO]
MANUARA KHATUN & ORS. VS. RAJESH KR. SINGH & ORS. [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY VS. ROSHAN LAL AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

SANJAY DHAR,J. - (1.)The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant against the Award dated 31.03.2007 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Leh Ladakh (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'). Before coming to the issues involved in the instant appeal, let me give a brief background of the facts leading to filing of the appeal.
1. On 22.07.2005, the deceased, namely, Norzin Angmo was travelling in a Tipper bearing Registration No. JK10-2610 towards Pullo Nobra. On reaching near North Pullo Nobra, the vehicle met with an accident, resulting in instant death of the deceased. The claimants happen to be the parents of the deceased, who was aged about 9 years old at the time of her death.

(2.)The claimants filed a claim petition before the Tribunal, claiming compensation in the amount of Rs. 25,18000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs and Eighteen Thousand) from the respondents. Respondent No. 1 in the claim petition happens to be the driver, respondent No. 2 happens to be the owner and respondent No. 3 happens to be the insurer of the offending vehicle. The claim petition was contested before the Tribunal by the respondent Nos. 1 and 3, i.e., the driver and the insurer, whereas respondent No. 2, the owner of the offending vehicle, chose not to contest the claim petition and he was set ex-parte.
(3.)After the trial of the case, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the deceased was travelling in the offending vehicle as gratuitous passenger and that the accident did take place on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. It was also established that respondent No. 2 before the Tribunal happened to be the owner, whereas respondent No. 3 happened to be the insurer of the offending vehicle at the time of the accident.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.