J.K. Ranka, J. - (1.) INSTANT civil misc. appeal has been filed by the appellants -claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of the impugned award dated 01/05/2009 passed by the MACT, Jaipur City, Jaipur in claim case No. 202/2008, whereby the claim petition filed by the claimants has been partly allowed granting compensation of Rs. 4,43,000/ -.
(2.) THE brief facts as can be gathered from the order of the Tribunal and arguments are that the appellants -claimants filed a claim petition on 05/10/2006 on account of death of one Ram Phool in road accident which occurred on 01/09/2006 at about 3.30 pm on National Highway No. 11 near village Samleti, District Dausa between a mini bus No. RJ -20 P -1247 and truck No. RJ -19 -1 -G -9266 and on account of the said accident, Ram Phool sustained severe and grievous injuries and on account whereof he died. Alongwith Ram Phool, one Gopal @ Gopali, who was also in the mini bus, got seriously injured. The claim was lodged, as aforesaid, by the appellants -claimants amounting to Rs. 31,05,000/ -. On account of non -appearance despite of service, the Tribunal proceeded ahead ex -parte against driver of the mini bus, driver of the truck so also owner of the truck and the finance company. However, the owner of the mini bus, in the present case, filed a written reply intimating therein that the said accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of the truck and there was no mistake of the mini bus and denied the averments made in the claim petition. It was also averred that since the mini bus was insured, therefore, they are not liable for any compensation. The respondent No. 2 -Insurance Company in the written statement submitted that there was breach of the conditions of the insurance policy in as much as there were more than 30 passengers sitting in the mini bus which was overloaded and mistake was of the mini bus driver/owner. It was further contended that on account of this overloading, the mini bus lost its balance and dashed with the truck rather than vice -versa and accordingly, denied the averments made in the claim petition.
(3.) THE respondent No. 5 -Oriental Insurance Company also filed its written statement and denied the averments made in the claim petition and it stated that there was no mistake of the truck driver and the mistake, if any, was on account of the mini bus being overloaded and dashing with the truck. An FIR, bearing No. 235/2006 came to be lodged and challan was filed before the appropriate court. The Tribunal, after considering all the averments and material on record including the statements of various witnesses and also the FIR as well as challan, while framing as many as five issues including the issue of relief, after detailed analysis, came to the conclusion that there was no mistake of the driver of the truck bearing No. RJ -19 -1 -G -9266 but the mistake was on account of the mini bus being overloaded and accordingly exonerated the driver and owner of the truck as also the respondent No. 5 -insurance company and the finance company but held Amar Singh, Surendra Singh and the respondent No. 2 -New India Insurance Company liable.;