- (1.) The instant appeal is directed against the award dated 16.4.2009 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bayana (Bharatpur), in M.C.A. Case No.373/2007 (775/2006), allowing the claim of claimant-respondents to the extent of Rs.2,42,000/- along with interest @ 6%.
(2.) The brief facts noticed are that it was claimed on behalf of the claimants that on 27.1.2006 one Samina @ Samnam was going with her sister's mother-in-law Kalia, in a tractor-trailer bearing no.RJ05 RA 1079. Though initially they are said to be in the tractor-trailer, but got down of it later-on. When they got down on the road, suddenly the tractor driver, Prem Singh, negligently drove the vehicle loosing control over it and consequent thereto Samina got hit by the tractor and received severe/grievous injuries and was then carried to the Govt. Hospital, Bharatpur, where the doctors declared her dead. It was, therefore, claimed that on account of negligence of the driver of tractor-trailer, the accident took place. FIR was lodged, and after investigation police filed charge-sheet against the driver under Section 304A IPC. The Tribunal, after analysing the material on record, allowed the claim to the extent of Rs.2,42,000/-, which has been assailed herein.
(3.) Learned counsel for appellant-Insurance Company contended that the tractor-trailer was meant only for carrying agricultural produce, and was not for the purpose to carry passengers as it was claimed that both, the deceased as well as Kalia, were travelling on the tractor, therefore, the policy conditions of the Insurance Company for which the tractor was insured, had been breached and violated. He further contended that the claim has been lodged in connivance with the owner/driver of the tractor and the Tribunal on assumption and presumptions, has come to the conclusion that the deceased and Kalia were standing on the road when the tractor hit Samina, rather the claim of the appellant is that while they were travelling/sitting in the tractor as passengers, on account of her own negligence, deceased fell down and got seriously injured and later-on died of her own. He further contended that this fact is clearly mentioned in the FIR as well that the deceased was run over by the tractor while she was stepping down from the tractor. He further contended that the driver of the tractor, for ulterior motive took amount from the deceased and Kalia and, therefore, it became a commercial vehicle and thus violated the conditions of the policy. He also contended that the quantum awarded is highly excessive. He, therefore, contended that the Tribunal on assumption and presumptions has allowed the claim which was not required to be allowed and the award of the Tribunal is perverse. In support of his claim, learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the judgments rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Brij Mohan & Others, 2007 3 TAC 20, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Vedwati & Others, 2007 2 TAC 8, National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. V. Chinnamma & Others, 2004 3 TAC 577, and of this court in the cases of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Vimlesh & Others,2012 1 MACD(Raj) 515, United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Smt. Kaushlya Bai & Others,2008 RAR 169, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pawan Tikkiwal & Others, 2007 4 TAC 77, Kailashi Devi & Others v. Srinarain & Others,2006 RAR 361, National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Rani & Others, 2006 ACJ 1224, and Mala Ram v. Roopa Ram & Others,2004 RAR 543.;