GANGTOK, India, May 11 -- Sikkim High Court issued the following judgment/order on April 6:

1. The Appellant impugns the Judgment, dated 30-09-2023, of the Learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Namchi, Sikkim (hereinafter, "MACT"), in MACT Case No.11 of 2020 (Dal Bahadur Thapa and Others vs. The Branch Manager, Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others), whereby the Appellant was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 48,10,000/- (Rupees forty-eight lakhs and ten thousand) only, with interest @ 9% to the Claimants, from the date of filing of the Claim Petition, i.e., 28-12-2020.

2. In brief, the case of the Claimants (Respondents No.1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 herein) is that the deceased Sagar Thapa, son of the Respondents No.1 and 2 and the sibling of the Respondents No.3, 4 and 5, was driving a motorcycle at "Gangtok road", from Ravangla, South Sikkim. As the deceased rider slowed down his motorcycle on account of the light traffic on the said road, the motorcycle was struck from behind by a loaded Tipper truck, bearing registration no.SK 04 D 0631, driven by the Respondent No.7, Krishna Pradhan. It is alleged that the driver of the said truck was not only driving in a rash and negligent manner, but was in a drunken state, while driving the truck towards Namchi Bazaar. The truck dragged both the driver of the motorcycle and the pillion rider to about 50 feet from the place where the accident occurred, resulting in the death of the rider and grievous injuries to the pillion rider. The rider of the motorcycle, as per the Respondents, was 29 years old at the time of the accident, working as an ad hoc Post Graduate teacher at Victoria Cross Ganju Lama Ravangla, Senior Secondary School, South Sikkim, earning a monthly salary of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) only. All the Claimants were solely dependent on the income of the deceased.

3. After the Appeal was filed before this Court, the name of the Respondent No.2 was struck off from the array of the Respondents, in terms of the Order dated 16-04-2025, as she had passed away.

4. Learned Counsel for the Appellant contends that firstly the driver of the motorcycle did not have the requisite driving licence, and was therefore not eligible to be drive. Secondly, the driver of the offending truck was found to be in a drunken state as has been proved by Exbt CW-12 relied on by the Respondents before the MACT. Hence, the Respondents are not at all entitled to the compensation computed, in view of the foregoing shortcomings. Even if the Respondents are found entitled to the compensation, the Respondent No.6, the owner of the truck, would be liable to pay it as the truck was being driven in breach of the conditions of the policy as alcohol was found in the blood of the driver as proved by the forensic report, Exbt CW-12.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcs.gov.in/hcs/hg_orders/201300000102025_13.pdf)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.