NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. GANDHWA ORAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals have been preferred against the common judgment and award dated 18.10.2012, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ranchi, whereby the appellant - National Insurance Company has been directed to pay the awarded compensation in the aforesaid miscellaneous appeals.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant-National Insurance Company has assailed the impugned judgment and award on the limited grounds that the Tribunal has erred in fastening the liability to pay the compensation on the appellant/ insurance company. It is urged that the tribunal has failed to appreciate that the claimants have nowhere stated in their claim application that the deceased persons were engaged as labourers in the truck. It is submitted by the counsel that the informant, who was travelling in truck bearing No. BEN-9255, has categorically stated that the persons boarded the truck but there is no averment or whisper that the deceased persons were working as labourers in the truck. It is argued that the tribunal has failed to consider that under 161 Cr. P.C. the witnesses in para-11 to 14 of the case-diary have stated that the deceased persons were travelling as passengers in the truck. That Om Prakash Sharma, the investigator-cum-surveyor of the Insurance Company has been examined as O.P.W. No. 1, and he has proved the report, Ext.-A, and deposed that the deceased were travelling as passengers and not as labourers of the truck. It is contended that the evidence on record supports the fact that the deceased persons were travelling as passengers in the truck hence, there has been violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy by the owner of the truck and the liability to pay the compensation should be fastened on the owner of the truck. That the claimants in collusion with the owner of the truck, have made amendments in their claim application stating that the deceased persons were the labourers. The amendment was incorporated after the owner recorded his statement that the deceased were employed as labourers in his truck. Such amendment in the pleading is an after thought and indicative of the collusiveness of the claimants and the owner with intent and object of helping the owner to escape the liability to pay the compensation. On the above grounds, learned counsel has urged that the impugned judgment/award is perverse and has been passed without considering and appreciating the facts stated in the claim application and the subsequent amendments made in the claim petition and the inherent contradictions in the deposition of the claimants. That the tribunal has not considered the evidence in proper perspective and accordingly the impugned judgment/award is fit to be set aside.

(3.) Learned counsel on behalf of the respondents/claimants has supported the impugned award and submitted that the learned counsel for the appellant has picked and chosen the statement of the witness examined under Section 161 Cr.P.C., 1973 to suit his arguments. It is contended that the said witnesses have categorically stated that the deceased were engaged as labourers of the truck. That the Tribunal has meticulously examined and discussed the material evidence on record and arrived at the finding that the deceased persons were engaged as labourers in the truck which was insured under a valid Insurance policy.