THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.AMARNATH GOUD
MACMA No.103 OF 2019
JUDGMENT:
1 This appeal is preferred by the appellant/Insurance Company questioning the Order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-XXVI Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short, the Tribunal) in M.V.O.P.No.2715 of 2016, dated 09.11.2018.
2 The brief facts of the case are that on 26.06.2016, one Krishnaiah (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') was travelling in a DCM bearing No.AP 10W 2056, which belongs to the 5th respondent herein and insured with the appellant herein, from Kandukur, and when the van reached Thummalur gate on highway he was loading vegetable bags into his DCM, at that time, another DCM bearing No.AP 03 V 4419 driven in a rash and negligent manner, dashed into the DCM van of the deceased. Due to the sudden impact, the deceased received multiple injuries and died on the spot. In connection with the said accident, a case in Cr.No.167 of 2016 was registered. The claimants who are wife, sons and mother of the deceased filed the MVOP 2715 of 2016 against owner of the DCM (respondent No.5 herein) and insurer (appellant herein), claiming compensation of Rs.12,00,000/- contending that the deceased was aged 36 years and was earning Rs.15,000/- per month.
3 Before the Tribunal, owner of the DCM van, remained ex parte. The appellant-Insurance Company filed its counter denying the allegations and contended that the amount claimed by the claimant is highly excessive and that it is not liable to pay any compensation and prayed to dismiss the claim petition.
4 After considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the DCM and awarded total compensation of Rs.12.00 lakhs under various heads, with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant/Insurance Company filed the present appeal.
5 Heard. 6 A perusal of the order reveals that the Tribunal has
passed the order by taking into consideration the income of the deceased as well as his age by the time of death and also the loss sustained by the claimants. Therefore, there are no grounds to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal. However, in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Swaran Singh1, the appellant-insurance company shall pay the compensation to the claimant at the first instance and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle thereafter.
1 (2004) 3 SCC 297 7 Accordingly, the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated above. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed. No order as to costs.
__________________________ T. AMARNATH GOUD, J.
Date: 19.04.2021 Kvsn