Sri P.K. Phukan, Member, MACT-1, Kamrup

COURT OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL
KAMRUP :: GUWAHATI
Present :-
P K Phukan
Member, MACT
Kamrup, Guwahati
MAC Case No. 1207/05
Md Farhad Ali ... Claimant
-Versus-
1 Md Nazim Ali
(Driver of the vehicle no. AMU-1493)
2 Md Boga Ali
(Driver of the above vehicle)
3 New India Assurance Co Ltd
(Insurer of the above vehicle) ... Opp Parties
Advocate for the claimant : Mr K U Ahmed, M A Sheikh, M H
Choudhury
Advocate for OP Nos. 1 & 2 : A R Medhi, Ms T Roy
Advocate for the OP No. 3 : Ms B Bairagi
Date of hearing argument : 14.12.12
Date of Judgment : 28.12.12
J U D G M E N T
The claimant, Farhad Ali, sustained injuries in a road traffic accident
which occurred on 14.03.05 at Ambari Road, Guwahati. His case in brief is
that on that fateful day at about 8.00 AM, he was going to Bagharbari
Chowk on foot, the offending vehicle bearing no. AMU-1493 knocked him
from behind, as a result he sustained grievous injury. He was immediately
shifted to hospital for treatment. He has preferred this claim u/s 166 of he
MV Act alleging that the accident took place due to rash and negligent
driving by the driver of the offending vehicle.
The OP Nos. 1 & 2, owner and driver of the offending vehicle
contested the claim and in their joint written statement pleaded that the
vehicle at the relevant time was insured with the New India Assurance Co
Ltd and as such the said company is liable to indemnify the owner if any
award is passed. It is admitted that policy commence from 15.03.05.
The OP No. 3, New India Assurance Co Ltd, took the plea that the
vehicle at the relevant time was not insured with the company.
1

EVIDENCE AND MATERIALS
On the basis of the pleadings, the following issues are framed for
adjudication :-
1 Whether claimant, Farhad Ali, sustained injuries in the alleged road
accident dated 14.03.05 involving the vehicle No. AMU-1493 and
whether the said accident took place due to rash and negligent
driving of the driver of the offending vehicle ?
2 Whether the claimant is entitled to receive any compensation and if
yes, to what extent and by whom amongst the respondents, the said
compensation amount will be payable ?
To prove the case, claimant has examined himself as PW-1 and
produced number of documents. The OP, insurer also examined DW-1 as a
witness.
I have heard argument for the claimant side and perused the
evidences and documents and upon consideration of the same the following
issues are decided as under :-
ISSUES NO 1 & 2
DECISIONS AND REASONS THEREOF
Both the issues were taken up together for discussions and decisions
for the sake of convenience and brevity.
2
There is no dispute regarding the injury sustained by Farhad Ali in the
accident which occurred on 14.03.05 at about 8.00 AM involving vehicle no.
AMU-1493. It has been averred by the claimant in the claim-petition and
stated in his evidence that on the fateful day at about 8.00 AM when he out
from his house to go to Bhagarbari was hit by the offending vehicle, as a
result of which he sustained grievous injuries. His evidence is that the
vehicle was driven by the driver in a rash and negligent manner, hit him
from backside. He was immediately taken to Apollo Clinic, Satgaon, after
preliminary treatment he was admitted into GMC Hospital and remained in
the hospital for 10 days. In support of his oral evidence he has proved the
Accident Information Report being Ex-2, FIR Ex-1 and the treatment
documents Ex-3 to Ex-9. The oral evidence of the claimant coupled with the
documents filed by him established that he sustained injuries in the
accident which took place due to sole negligence of the driver of the Truck

no. AMU-1493. Since he sustained injuries in the accident due to rash and
negligent driving by the driver of the vehicle, he is entitled to
compensation. He was initially treated at Apollo Clinic vide Ex-3 and
subsequently he came to GMC Hospital and admitted in the hospital on
21.03.05 and was discharged on 23.03.05.
From the documents of the GMCH Ex-6 to Ex-8, it is found that he
sustained injuries on his knee joint of the right leg, right foot and
backbone. No serious injuries was suffered by him. He claims to have to
have spent Rs 33,000/- for his treatment but could not produce documents.
He produced only cash-memos for Rs 441/- only. Considering the nature of
the injury suffered by him and the duration of the treatment Rs 5000/- is
awarded for medical expenses and Rs 3000/- is awarded for pain and
suffering. Thus the total compensation comes to Rs 8,000/-.
Now the pertinent question is who is liable to pay the compensation
to the claimant.
Insurance company produced Ex-A policy of insurance through DW-1
which shows that the policy was effective from 15.03.05 to 14.03.06.
Admittedly the accident occurred on 14.03.05. The policy was not valid on
the day of the accident and as such the company is not liable to pay
compensation and it is the owner who is liable to pay the compensation to
the claimant.
These issues are decided accordingly in favour of the claimant.
A W A R D
Rs 8,000/- (Rupees eight thousand) is awarded with interest @ 6%
p.a. from the date of filing the claim petition, i.e. 17.06.05, till payment.
The OP No. 1, Md Nazim Ali, is directed to pay the award within one month
from the date of order.
Given under my hand & seal of this Court on this 28h day of
December 2012.
3
(P K Phukan)
Member
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
Kamrup, Guwahati