Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88253 Court No. - 2 Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1216 of 2016 Appellant :- The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Respondent :- Smt. Vijay Laxmi And 9 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Arvind Kumar Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Achindra Kumar holding brief of Sri Arvind Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant. 2. The present appeal has been filed against the judgement and award dated 11.12.2015 as amended by order dated 15.03.2016 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kanpur Dehat in MACP No.515 of 2011, whereby the tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.25,62,804/- alongwith 7% interest from the date of institution of claim petition for the death of one Rambali in an accident on 21.07.2011 with vehicle No.UP78BT/1855. 3. Challenging the award, learned counsel for the appellant- insurance company has contended that it is a case of head on collision between the offending vehicle No.UP78BT/1855 and the motorcycle No.UP78BX/6360 which was driven by the deceased. It is contended that since it is a case of head on collision and the manner in which the accident had taken place clearly shows that in the said accident the deceased was also negligent and therefore, the Tribunal should have reduced the compensation to the extent of negligence of the deceased in the accident. It is contended that to prove the negligence of the deceased in the accident, site plan of the accident had been filed. It is further contended that the offending vehicle being the transport vehicle should have a valid permit for plying on the road. It is contended that in the instant case, no permit was filed on record and thus, the owner has committed breach of policy and the insurance company should have been given the right of recovery. 4. Lastly, it is alleged that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive inasmuch as the income tax which was paid by the deceased was not deducted from the income of the deceased for computing the compensation. It is contended that the route permit of the offending vehicle was within the radius of 6 Kms in Kanpur Nagar whereas the accident was beyond 6 Kms from the radius of Kanpur Nagar and thus, there was breach of terms and conditions of the permit and therefore, the insurance company cannot be fastened with the liability and should have been given the right of recovery. 5. Be that as it may, the Tribunal on the issue of negligence of the deceased in the accident has considered the testimony of eye witness and other evidence led on record to conclude that the accident was result of sole negligence of driver of offending vehicle No.UP78BT/1855. 6. The Tribunal has categorically recorded a finding that the respondent i.e. insurance company did not lead any evidence to establish that there was negligence of the deceased in the accident. The finding returned by the Tribunal on the issue of contributory negligence is a finding of fact based upon proper appreciation of facts and evidence on record. 7. So far as the quantification of compensation is concerned, there was evidence on record from which it could be inferred that the deceased was income tax payee. Since there is no evidence on record indicating that the deceased was income tax payee, therefore, the Tribunal has not committed any illegality in not deducting the income tax from the income of the deceased for assessing compensation. 8. So far as the contention of learned counsel for the appellant with regard to breach of permit is concerned, the Tribunal has categorically recorded a finding that the insurance company did not lead any evidence to establish that the owner has committed breach of route permit. The burden was upon the insurance company to prove that breach of route permit was committed and since in the instant case, a categorical finding has been returned by the Tribunal that the insurance company did not lead any evidence to prove that the owner has committed breach of route permit. In such view of the fact, the owner has not committed any breach of insurance policy. 9. Thus, for the reasons given above, the appeals lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 23.5.2025 SSharma Digitally signed by :- SUNIL KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad