Court No. - 26
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 2858 of 2012 Appellant :- United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Respondent :- Hari Kant Bhurtiya And Others Counsel for Appellant :- Amaresh Sinha,R.S. Shukla
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard counsel for the appellant.
The appellant-insurance company has preferred the present appeal challenging the judgment and award dated 3.4.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No. 11 Allahabad, whereby the Tribunal has awarded Rs.2,27,000/- along-with 6% interest to the claimants-respondents for the death of 12 years child namely Km. Shusmi.
The appellant has challenged the impugned award on two counts namely that the jeep was insured for private purpose, whereas it was used for commercial purpose, at the time of accident as it was carrying passengers. The second submission made by the counsel for the appellant is that the Tribunal has erred in not deducting any amount towards personal expenses of the deceased and, therefore, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on higher side.
In respect of first submission of the counsel for the appellant, the order passed by the Tribunal reveals that the Tribunal has recorded a finding that the appellant has not got any issue framed in respect of breach of policy on the ground of use of vehicle for commercial purpose though, it was insured for private purpose. The Tribunal further recorded a finding that the appellant has not led any evidence on the issue, as to whether the jeep was carrying passenger or not. By recording the aforesaid finding, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that there was no breach of insurance policy committed by the owner of the vehicle. The finding of the Tribunal on the said issue is based on proper appreciation of facts and evidence on record and the counsel for the appellant could not demonstrate from the record that the said finding is not based on proper appreciation of evidence on record. Thus, the finding on the aforesaid issue is a finding of fact and is not liable to be interfered in appeal.
So far as, the submission of the counsel for the appellant in respect of quantification of amount is concerned, though the counsel may be right in his submission that the Tribunal ought to have deducted 1/2 towards personal expenses of the deceased but the fact remains that the Court is duty bound to grant just and fair compensation to the claimants.
It is settled in law that the claimants are entitled for future prospect in case of death of minor also and had the Tribunal awarded future prospect, the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal would have been same.
Thus, in the opinion of the Court, the amount awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper.
For the reasons given above, the appeal lacks merit and is hereby dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 29.11.2018 Ishan