IN THE COURT OF THE MEMBER, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL SONITPUR AT

Present : Smti. M. Nandi., Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sonitpur, Tezpur

MAC Case No. 279 of 2012(P)

1. Smti. Niru Bharali, W/O Late Karun Bharali Vill – Murhadol, Solaguri P.O. & P.S. – Jamuguri Dist – Sonitpur,

-Versus-

1. New Assurance Co. Ltd. Tezpur Branch, Tezpur Dist – Sonitpur, Assam

2. Md. Azibul Hussain, S/O- Late Ratigul Hussain. Vill , , P.O & P.S. Kaliabar Dist –Nagaon, Assam

3. Md. Saiful Islam S/O Md. Gulam Hussain, R/O No.1 Bhurbandha P.O. Lowkhowa P.S. Rupahihat. Dist. Nagaon, Assam. …………………….. opposite parties.

ADVOCATES APPEARED

For the claimant : -Sri S. Khan, Advocate. For the O.P. No.1 :- Sri P. Sethi, Advocate. For the O.P. NO. 2 & 3 :- Ex-parte. Date of Argument :-22-11-2017. Date of Judgment :-30-11-2017. Page 1 of 7

J U D G M E N T

The claimant Smti. Niru Bharali has filed an application u/s 166 of MV Act, 1988, claiming compensation on account of damage of her vehicle bearing No. AS-12G-3135 in a motor vehicle accident.

1. The brief fact of the case is that on 11-07-12 at about 4-00 A.M. the vehicle bearing No. AS-12G/3135 (Bolero) was going from Tezpur towards Kaliabor . When the said vehicle reached near Kaliabor Bridge at about 4-30 A.M. another vehicle bearing No. AS-12C/2548 ( 207 DI Tata Truck) was coming from opposite direction with loaded timbers and due to rash and negligent driving, the driver of the said vehicle could not control himself and hit the vehicle of the claimant bearing No. AS-12G/3135. As a result the Bolero vehicle of the claimant has been fully damaged for which she is claiming compensation amounting to Rs. 8,00,000/-( Rupees Eight lakhs) from the insurer of the offending vehicle.

2. After the accident, one case was registered vide Tezpur P.S. case No. 1015/12 u/s- 279/338/427 IPC. At the time of accident, the alleged offending vehicle was insured with New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vide policy No. 53070431120200003421 valid up to 11-07-13.

3. Against the claim petition, the O.P. No. 1 i.e. alleged insurer of the vehicle bearing No. AS-12C/2548(207 DI Tata Truck) has submitted written statement wherein it is stated that the policy No. 53070431120200003421 of the said 207 D.I. Tata Truck bearing No. AS-12C/2548 which was insured with O.P. No. 1 as cited by the claimant in the claim petition is an invalid policy as because on the relevant date and time of the said accident which took place on 11-07-2012 at 4- 00 A.M. the validity of the insurance policy do not cover for the said period and the said policy period was from 12-07-12 to 11-07-13. As such the claim is not maintainable against the O.P. No. 1 and is liable to be dismissed.

4. On the pleadings aforesaid the following issues were framed –

I. Whether the alleged accident took place due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the vehicle bearing no. AS-12C/2548 (207 DI Tata Truck) Page 2 of 7

and whether the vehicle AS-12G/3135 has been completely damaged due to the alleged accident?

II. Whether the claimant is entitled to any compensation as prayed for?

5. I have heard argument advanced by Learned Counsel of both sides. I have also perused the documents available in the record.

Issue 1 and 2

6. The claimant was examined in the case as CW-1 who deposed in her evidence that she is the owner of the vehicle bearing No. AS-12G/3135 . On 11- 07-12 when the said vehicle was going from Tezpur towards Kaliabor and when the said vehicle reached near Kaliabor Bridge at about 4-30 A.M. another vehicle bearing No. AS-12G/2548 ( 207 DI Tata Truck) coming from opposite direction loaded with timbers in a rash and negligent manner for which the driver of the tata truck could not control himself and hit her bolero vehicle. As a result, her vehicle has been completely damaged. The estimated cost of the vehicle was Rs. 4,00,000/- ( Rupees four lakhs) as given by the mechanic .

7. CW-1 has exhibited the following documents.

Ext 1 charge sheet.

Ext 2 sketch map.

Ext 3 to 3(1) seizure list.

Ext 4 to 4(1) MVI report.

Ext claim intimation letter.

8. In his cross examination CW-1 replied that she has claimed for the damage of her own vehicle Bolero. On 11-07-12 at 4-00 P.M. her Bolero vehicle bearing No. AS-12G/3135 met another vehicle bearing No. AS-12C/2548 (207 DI Tata Truck) at Kaliabor Bridge. Both the vehicles were plying on opposite direction and dashed against each other. She has not made party to the driver as well as insurer of her said Bolero vehicle. At the time of accident, the said Bolero vehicle was insured with New India Assurance Co. Ltd. She has obtained Page 3 of 7

compensation for her damaged vehicle from New India Assurance Co. Ltd. to the tune of Rs. 1,06,000/-. She has not brought any witness to prove the damage or repair of her vehicle.

9. Ext. 1 is the charge sheet submitted against the driver of the Tata truck Md. Saiful Islam bearing No.AS-12C/2548 u/s- 279/338/427 IPC. Ext. 2 is the sketch map. Ext. 3 is the seizure list of seizing the Tata Truck bearing No. AS-12C/2548 and its documents. Ext. 3(i) is the another seizure list of seizing the Bolero vehicle bearing No.AS-12G/3135 and its documents. Ext. 4 is the MVI report of the Bolero vehicle bearing No. AS-12G/3135. On examination MVI found the following damages-

(i) Front bumper, grill, bonnet and R.H.S. Head light assembly. (ii) R.H.S. front wheel mudguard assembly. (iii) Body shell including doors and seats. (iv) All wind shield glasses. (v) Desk board and meter panel assembly. (vi) Steering assembly out lined. (vii) Front wheel assembly out lined. (viii) Chassis suspected bend and out lined. (ix) Radiator assembly displaced and effected. (x) Engine and gear box assembly displaced and suspected effected.

10. The MVI opined that the vehicle was found in damaged condition and hence could not be road tested to ascertain the present mechanical condition. 11. From the MVI report it reveals that the claimant’s Bolero vehicle was damaged due to the accident which took place on 11-07-12 but no any police report has been exhibited in this case. One Xerox copy of police report in connection with Tezpur P.S. case No. 1015/15 is found in the record which was issued on 17-07-12 stating that at about 4-30 P.M. one accident took place at NH-37 near Kaliabhumura Bridge in between one Bolero vehicle bearing No. AS- 12G/3135 and one 207 DI vehicle bearing No. AS-12C/2548 loaded with timbers. The said Bolero vehicle was going from Tezpur town towards Kaliabor and the timbers loaded in 207 DI vehicle was coming from Kaliabor side towards Tezpur

Page 4 of 7

Mission Chariali. The accident occurred due to fault of the driver of 207 DI. As a result both the vehicles have been damaged.

12. As per MVI report the vehicle bearing No. AS-12G/3135 has been damaged due to the alleged accident. The claimant also admitted that she has received the compensation of Rs. 1,06,000/- ( Rupees one lakh six thousand) only for her damaged vehicle from New India Assurance Co. Ltd. i.e. insurer of her vehicle. The claimant nowhere stated that she has repaired the vehicle for which she had paid the amount as claimed in the claim petition. One Xerox copy of quotation has been submitted showing the estimated cost of the vehicle. The alleged Bolero vehicle AS-12G/3135 was not examined by any authorized surveyors to assess the damage of the vehicle. The claimant has nowhere stated that her vehicle was examined by any authorized surveyor to assess the damage. The person who issued the quotation did not put any signature for A.K. Motors. Hence, it cannot be said that the said quotation was prepared by any employee of A.K. Motors. No any witness was examined by the claimant to prove the damage or repair of her vehicle. No any photograph of the damaged vehicle is available in the record so that we can assess the damage of the vehicle.

11. Under such circumstances, I am of the view that the claimant is not entitled for any further compensation due to damage of her vehicle. It is admitted by the claimant herself that she has received Rs. 1,06,000/- as compensation from the insurer of her vehicle. If she is not satisfied on payment of less amount for the damage of her Bolero vehicle, it is not the proper Forum to claim compensation. She has to seek redress from Consumer Forum.

12. Hence, issue No. 1 and 2 are decided accordingly.

O R D E R

13. In the result, claim petition is dismissed. There is no order as to cost.

Page 5 of 7

Given under my hand and seal on this 30th day of November, 2017.

Dictated and corrected by me.

( M. Nandi.) Member, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sonitpur, Tezpur. Sonitpur, Tezpur.

Page 6 of 7

A N N E X U R E

1.Witness of the Claimant:

Smti. Niru Bharali.

2. Witness of the Defence:

3.Claimant’s Exhibits:

Ext 1 charge sheet.

Ext 2 sketch map.

Ext 3 to 3(1) seizure list.

Ext 4 to 4(1) MVI report.

Ext claim intimation letter.

4.Exhibits of the defence.

Nil.

(M. Nandi.) Member MACT, Sonitpur, Tezpur.

Page 7 of 7