Dismissed

Smt Rashmit Kaur v. Ashok Jeewan Lal Bansod and Others

Chhattisgarh HC14 Mar 2007MAC/310/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In appeals against an award by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, this single bench held that the award for the death of the husband, Arjun Hora, and Ku. Harsat Hora was just and reasonable. The appeals were dismissed at the stage of admission.

What did the court decide?

The appeals are dismissed at the stage of admission; the compensation awarded by the MAC.T. stands affirmed.

Smt Rashmit Kaur Vs Ashok Jeewan Lal Bansod and Others — Chhattisgarh HC (2007) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURTOFGHHATTISOARMATBILASPUR

¶3

MA.fCl N0.310^007

¶4

SINGLEBENCH: Hon'MeShtlOili&RaosihefaDesttniukh^T APPELLANT Smt.RashinitKayr.Wdto CLAtMANT EshvinderStngh Hora (IVUku Hora). Aged about^ Yrs. R/© Quarter No. 17, ParthsEWi Nagar Nagora|& State, Mohaba Bazar, Raipur.jTah. & Distt. R^ipur (C.G^J Versus

¶5

RESPONDENTS 1. Ash©k^@ewa»iLal BsBisodiS/6 NON.APP»LICAlTS Jeewan Ud BansQd, a®ed about |24 Yrs. R/0 Village Phulchur, Posfc ©ondia,Tah, & DJstt.^<Miclia(Mtehaiastifea) 2. Vinod jBhupat Lat ^4afeffilre, Occup^fion Track Owner, R/o Vitl-Phi^lchur, Post ©onclia, Tah. j & Dtstfc^^^^^^ <^^ (Maharjashtr's^ 3. Ther C^rienN iCTSurance Co. Ltd., QMsjbnal Offiee GoiicUa. .Threygjh:''^' ^:1.-.; .•.,'1.,'. DlvisiQiial Man^ OfRc^, j Kachaehari ChOt^. JaM Raipur(C.©^ 4. Sint. ! Kartar Kaur,, Wo^ Mahencter^Sicig|i NI&iRa^ i^etf Bto ^jbout j ?1& years^ (gurunaRak Ward, ^o@dia» Distt. Qondia ^laharasWtra^ 5. Mahenjdra Si^h Nora, Sto Bha@ ©mghHoia, a^d about G5 years, R/o S, Ouruiianate Ward, jTah. & Distt. Gondia (MahaitashtraQ

M.A^Gl.lto. 312/2007

APPELLANT CLAIIHANT

RESPONDENTS\

Versus

SfiLFi^rnftl<a^ Esh^i^FStr^jHwa.^St^ Ho^,^edat)Gtrt29Yi®.1^@ CHiarte|rNo,17,f>s ttiaviNagar NagoraoState.Mohatoa^a^ar, Raipyit. Tah. & Distt. Ralpur (C.G.)1

¶12

Ashok Jeewawi Lal Bar®od,^6

¶13

!li! j JJ

¶14

^"r ', J. -L.,.. i_l:!LL..::.:

NON-APPUCANTS

Jeewan Lal Bansod, aged about 24 Yrs. R/0 ViUage Flhutehur, P^t Gwidja, Tah. & Distt. Gondia (Maharashtral Vinod Bhupat Lal Matvare, Occupaft'on Truck Owner, R/o VJll-Phutchur, Post Gondia, Tah. & Di^tt. Gondia (Maharashtra) The Orientel Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional OIRce Gendia, Through: / Divisional Manager, C^vistonal Office, Kachachari Chouk, Jail Raipur(C.G.)

MA(C^. No. 313^007

"^,-

APPELLANT CLAlMANf

RESPONDENTS NON^PPUCANTS

Versus

Smt. Rashntit Kaur. Wd/o Eshvidciw Singh Howa ^tai Hoi^, Aged about29Yrs.R^o QuarterNo. 17, Parthavi Nagar Nagorao State.Mohaba Bazar. Raipur, Tah. & Distt. Raipur (C.G.) |

¶27

Ashok Jeewan Lal Bansod, S/o Jeewan jLal Bansod. aged about 24 Yrs. R/0 Viilage Phulchur, Post Gondla, Tah. & Distt. Gondia (MaharashtFa) Vinod Bhupat Lal Malvare, Occupation Truck Owner, R/o ViU-PhuiGhur, Post ponelia, Tah. & Dtstt. Gomlta

¶28

(Maharashfra) The Oriental tnsyrance Co. Ltd.. Divisional Oflice Goodia, Through: DMslonalj Manager. DMisioRal OfRce, Kachachan' Chouk, Jail Raipur(C.G.)

¶29

Present : Shri P. M. Shrivas, Counsel fdrtheappellantfs

¶30

.^ ORALORDBR ; (Passed on 14th March, 2007) '\

¶31

— 3 -

¶32

¶33

This order being passed in MA(C) No.310/2@07 shall govein MAX3.NOS.312^2007 and 313^307 atso.

¶34

Heard teamed counsel on admissien on aB the aforesald M.A.Gs; 3. Brief fads aw ths^ Snrt.Rashmtt Kaur fited three appticsrtions fot compensation white {mpteadjng ttre ctrh/er, owneir an<i frmirer of truclc No.MH 2®-1©12and flie parente of her dec^ised hysband Estwincter Singh Hora as I'lon-apptteants, for the death of her hysband Eshvinder Singh Hora and her two chiNren Arjun Hora, aged|©years and Ku. 1-tarjsft Hora, aged 115 months vrtro were travelltng tn a 'Qtiatis' vehiete bearing No. M.H.3S-AG 6305 on 3.6.2005 froni©ore@a@ntoGondla. The sat^ Quatis vehiete met with an acclderrt wth a frudc bearing No. M.l-t. 351912 being driven by the respondent No,1-/tehok, owiied by ftie res^ondent No^-Vinod and insured by respondent no.S-the Iti^uianw Cewnpaiiy. The claimant cltd notadduGe anyevidenee eitheroBaley decumentary (o prove the age of her deeeased ttustoaR^ gshwneter Singh N@Ea. The learaed M.A.C.T. relying upon ttre poltee report assesse^ the ^e of fshyimter Singh Hbra as 40 years and awarded compcaisflftion of R8.@,^,^)©/- tt vras ftjriher directed fiat out of the aforesaid amount, an aKioHnt of Rs.1,20,000/-each was to t>ei»idto respoffldent Nos,4 & 5 i.e ttie parente ofthe deceased Eshvjnder ©inghHoraandthereHiaWHg Rs.4,2@,^)W-to the appetlant herein. The teamed M.A.C.T. also aviffiirded GenipensafioR of Rs.1,57,000/- each for thedeceased Arjun Singh H@ra, aged 8 years andH^ratHoraagedlSinonttis.

¶35

The only point urged by ttie (Mw'ned coi.insel forttie appettant tn ttt^e appeals }s ttiat so far as ttie death of Estwlnder Sh^h Hora in ttie accident is concemed, th®(earned MAC.T. applted the WFong inyWplier and that no conEipeitsation was awafded for toss ofltoveand afleetion. No other point was urged.

¶36

So far as the firM point urged by the t^sumed counsel for the appetlant is con^mecl, a perusal ^ the impugnN awatd shows that the " ' learned M.AX).T,^T@tied upon the poltcereport. '•1,-...' ': for-'. assessment c^ the age •v":;.'':.1'- ,- '/:. j'"' of the deceased ^shvineler Singh Hora whtoh {(Bselosed ttm 8®e of ^shfvinder Singh Hoi» as 4©years. Leamed ceunset for the appellant

'/,

^ -

fairlyconcededttiattheclaimantdtelnotfumfehaBypFoofofttieageofttie deceasedEshvtnderSinghHorabeforetheteaFnedM.A.C.T.tnthisview of ttie matter, ttie multiplier of I®was rtghtly adopted by th@ tearne^ M.A.C.T. and the flrst ground uiged by the teamed wttns^ fer the appellant fatls. So far asthe secontfground urQed teyhifflitseefficwined, the leamed Tribunat has awarcted a sum @f f^.5,000/- each towards loss of mother's love whieh satisfies tt»epolrrt uisged by ftie toarned e&unsel for the appellanfc tn this \rt<w of the matter. both the grotmds uiged by ttie tearned counsel havenoforoe. 6. Having thus coRslriered the arguiaerils a^anced by ttie l^im^t counsel yor the appetlant and after perusing ttie trapBgned award, t am of the considered opinion that the coropensatj^ awiard^ t^ 13w teame^ Claims Tribunat for tti®deatti of Esftvinder Smgh Hora, Ai^in Hora and Ku. H^jrat Hora is just aiid rea^onstote compensatien. Afl th^e app^als

¶41

being devoid ofmeritaredismisseclatthestageofadniission.

¶42

Awpyofthisor(ierb6ke|^lnMA^Fte.31t/2W7and313^^

¶43

also.

¶44

Sd/MUpRaosahebDeshmuldi Judge

¶45

x^". '.

¶46

..>

Smt Rashmit Kaur v. Ashok Jeewan Lal Bansod and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Rashmit Kaur v. Ashok Jeewan Lal Bansod and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Chhattisgarh and Another Vs Seth Kirodimal Dharmada Trust and Others

United India Insurance Comp. Ltd. Vs Munna Singh and Others

Suresh Singh Vs Vijay Kumar Sonale and Another

P.Vijaya and Another Vs Mangal Jeet Singh and Others

Yuvraj Singh Vs Ganpat Ram Sahu and Another

Smt.Anita Sahu Vs Rajesh Sahu