- (1.) THIS appeal is against a judgment and award dated 23rd April, 2008, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fourth Court, Paschim Medinipur in MACC No.521 of 2003. The appellant claimants are the husband, two sons and an unmarried daughter of late Parul Bala Mahato, who was killed in an accident arising out of the use of the vehicle (a Hero Honda motor bike) bearing the registration no.WB - 34H/5588. The said vehicle was owned by the respondent opposite party no.2 and admittedly, covered by a policy of insurance issued by the respondent opposite party no.1, National Insurance Company Limited.
(2.) IT is the case of the claimants that the deceased victim was waiting at the Mandalkupi bus stoppage on R. M. Road to board a bus. She was standing at the extreme left side of the road when the said motor cycle, which was being driven in an extremely rash and negligent manner towards Medinipur side and Chandrakona Road, hit the victim as a result of which, the victim sustained grievous injury all over her body and specially at the back of her head. The local people took the victim to Medinipur Sadar Hospital where she was admitted, but, she died on the next day, that is, on 18th December, 2002. The appellant claimants claim that the accident took place, as the offending motor cycle was being driven in a rash and negligent manner, violating the traffic rules. According to the claimants, the victim was forty years of age and she earned Rs.100/ - per day by selling puffed rice and paddy. The victim allegedly left four dependants, including, an unmarried daughter. The appellant claimants have claimed compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It is not in dispute that the appellant also claimed compensation under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act and the claimants received Rs.50,000/ - under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act on no fault liability basis. In the written statement, the insurer has denied that any accident involving the vehicle took place on 18th December, 2002. The insurer has also denied that the deceased was involved in the alleged accident. There was not a whisper in the written statement that the victim was a pillion rider.
(3.) IN the additional written statement, in paragraphs 3 and 4, it is alleged as follows: " That initially FIR was lodged by the husband of the deceased Rampada Mahato alleging that his wife, deceased parul Mahato was standing beside pitch road at Mandolkupi and one Hero Honda motor cycle dashed her, which is totally false and baseless and strongly denied by this O.P. That this O.P. submits that after getting the investigating report from the investigator it has been brought to the notice of this O.P. that the deceased Parul Mahato was pillion rider of the alleged motor cycle bearing no. WB -34H/5588 at the relevant time of accident and she fell down from the said motor cycle and received severe injuries and she was admitted at Salboni rural hospital and in her treatment sheet according to the attending doctor of the deceased Parul Mahato the injuries were caused by accidental fell from the running motor cycle and the concerned P.S. case was investigated by the police and it has transpired from the charge sheet as well as the inquest report that the said Parul Mahato died due to fell from the running motor cycle at Mandalkupi. " ;