Nov - High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1034 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2009
2006 under Sections 279, 304A, Indian
Penal Code in Police Station Kurawali,
District Mainpuri. The deceased was aged
34 years at the time of his death and was a
healthy person. The deceased was an
agriculturist and was carrying on the
business of sale and purchase of
buffaloes, and his monthly income was
not less than 7,000/- rupees. An amount
of Rs.24,25,000/- with interest @ 12 %
per annum was claimed as compensation
in the Claim Petition.
3. Joint Written Statement was filed
by respondent nos. 8 and 10. The
Appellant- Insurance Company also filed
its Written Statement.
The Tribunal framed four issues.
Issue no.1 was as to whether the
Driver of the aforesaid vehicle in question
while driving the same in rash and
negligent manner, hit the said Ram
Prakash resulting in the death of the said
Ram Prakash. The Tribunal decided the
said issue in the affirmative in favour of
the claimant-respondent nos. 1 to 7.
Issue no.2 was as to whether the
vehicle in question was insured with the
Appellant-Insurance Company at the time
of the accident. The Tribunal held that the
vehicle in question was insured with the
Appellant-Insurance Company at the time
of the accident, and decided Issue no.2
accordingly.
Issue no. 3 was as to whether the
Driver of the vehicle in question was
having a valid and effective licence at the
time of the accident. The Tribunal held
that the Driver of the vehicle in question
was having a valid and effective licence at
the time of the accident, and decided Issue
no.3 accordingly.
Issue no.4 was regarding the relief, if
any, to which the claimant-respondent
nos.1 to 7 were entitled. The Tribunal
held that the claimant-respondent nos. 1
to 7 were entitled to compensation
amounting to Rs.4,89,500/- with interest
@ 6% per annum.
4. The Appellant- Insurance
Company has filed the present appeal
against the said award.
5. We have heard Sri Saral
Srivastava, learned counsel for the
appellant and perused the record filed
with the appeal.
6. From the perusal of the record, it
is evident that an application under
Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988 was filed on behalf of the Appellant-
Insurance Company before the Tribunal.
However, by the order dated 7.3.2009, the
Tribunal rejected the said application.
7. Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988 lays down as under:-
"170 Impleading insurer in certain
cases- Where in the course of any inquiry,
the Claims Tribunal is satisfied that –
(a) there is collusion between the
person making the claim and the person
against whom the claim is made, or
(b) the person against whom the
claim is made has failed to contest the
claim,
it may, for reasons to be recorded in
writing, direct that the insurer who may
be liable in respect of such claim, shall be
impleaded as a party to the proceeding