S. N. Pathak - (1.) Heard the parties.
(2.) This appeal has been preferred against the Award dated 20.09.2014 passed by the Presiding Officer, Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal, Ranchi in Compensation Case No.120/2008, whereby and whereunder the learned Tribunal has been pleased to allow the claim petition of the applicants and has held that the claimants are entitled to a total amount of Rs. 3,95,000/- towards compensation to be paid by the O.P. No.2-appellant (herein) through account payee cheque in the joint name of both the applicants-respondent Nos.1 & 2 (herein). The O.P. No.2, National Insurance Co. Ltd. has further been directed to make the aforesaid payment after deducting the amount of Rs.50,000/- paid in compliance of the order passed u/S 140 of the M.V. Act with interest @ 6 % p.a. from the date of filing of claim application i.e. 20.09.2008 till the date of payment i.e. one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the O.P. No. 2 shall pay interest @ 9 % per annum from the said date of the receipt of copy of the judgment/award till the date of realization of the awarded amount. It is further held that insurer is not liable to indemnify the insured.
(3.) As per the claim application, the facts of the case is that the claim application was filed by Ram Kishore Mahto and Righan Devi (respondent Nos. 1 & 2 respectively) claiming for compensation on account of death of their son, who at the time of accident was aged about 13 years. The claimants have asserted that the deceased was a brilliant student of Class-V at Dayanand Arya Vidya Public School, Ranchi. The accident took place on 26.08.2008 at Lohardaga. It is alleged that Dilip Kumar Mahto-deceased was going to his school, when a truck bearing registration No. JH 02 K 3221 being driven rashly and negligently by its driver crushed Dilip Kumar Mahto, to death. The alleged truck was owned by Satendra Kumar Prajapati i.e. Respondent No.3 and insured with the National Insurance Co. Ltd.-appellant compensation to tune of Rs. 2.50 lac has been claim with interest at the rate of 9 % per annum. The O.P. No.1/respondent No.3 (herein)/owner has appeared and filed his written statement admitting the vehicle owned by him and has stated that the vehicle was properly insured with the O.P. No.2-Appellant/ Insurance Company Ltd. The accident on account of rash and negligent driving has been denied and it has been stated that the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation and in terms of the insurance contract, Insurer has agreed to indemnify the O.P. O.P. No.2/Insurance Company Ltd. herein appellant in its written statement dated 05.10.2012 has stated that the vehicle was running without road permit, as road permit was valid from 28.08.2008 to 14.12.2008. It has been stated that the Insurance Policy is not disputed but there is violation of terms and conditions of the insurance contract and hence, the insurer is not liable to indemnify the insured. Other objection with regard to D.L. etc. has also been taken..;