HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI
M.A.C.M.A. No.2127 of 2019
JUDGMENT :
This appeal is filed by the United India Insurance Company aggrieved by the order and decree dated 25.01.2019 in M.V.O.P.No.491 of 2016 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Nizamabad.
2. According to the petitioner, on 7.8.2016 at about 7-45 p.m. at Donkal village shivar, while the deceased Kengenla Sandeep was travelling on Tractor bearing No. TS 16 ED 4220 attached to its trolley No. TS 16 ED 4207 as a labour to attend the work at the agriculture fields of respondent No.1, in the meanwhile, the driver of tractor drove it in rash and negligent manner and could not control it and hit the road side tree, due to which the tractor turned turtle and the deceased came under the tractor and sustained fractures and injuries all over the body and died on the spot. According to the petitioners, the deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month as a labour under respondent No.1. Thus, the petitioners are claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- against the respondent Nos.1 and 2, who are owner and insurer of the tractor and trolley.
2
GSD, J MACMA.No.2127 of 2019
3. Respondent No.1 remained ex parte; Respondent No.2 filed counter disputing the manner of accident, age, avocation and income of the deceased. It is further contended that the owner of the tractor and trolley has violated the terms and conditions of insurance policy.
4. Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues:
1. Whether the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of tractor bearing No. TS 16 ED 4220 attached to its trolley bearing No. TS 16 ED 4207 by its driver causing death of Kengenla Sandeep?
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation, if so, to what extent and from whom?
3. To what relief?
5. In order to prove their case, PWs.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.A1 to A5 were marked. On behalf of the respondent No.2, RWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.B1 to B3 and Ex.X1 were marked.
6. The Tribunal on considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, partly allowed the O.P., awarding a total compensation of Rs.6,78,000/- along with proportionate costs and 3 GSD, J MACMA.No.2127 of 2019 interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization with a direction to the respondent No.2-Insurance Company to deposit the compensation within one month from the date of award and recover the same from the respondent No.1. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant-Insurance Company has filed this appeal.
7. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company and the learned counsel for the claimants-respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein. Perused the material available on record.
8. The learned Standing Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company argued that the deceased was travelled on the tractor as unauthorized passenger and the Tribunal erred in directing the Insurance Company to pay the compensation and recover the same from respondent No.2. Accordingly, prayed to set aside the impugned order in the O.P.
9. The learned counsel for the respondent No.1/claimant submitted that the learned Tribunal has awarded reasonable compensation against the respondent No.2 and the same needs no interference by this Court.
4
GSD, J MACMA.No.2127 of 2019
10. With regard to the manner of accident, after evaluating the evidence of PWs.1 and 2 coupled with the documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal rightly held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the tractor and trolley.
11. Coming to the quantum of compensation, the petitioners contended that the deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month by working as labour under respondent No.1. However, as there is no evidence produced by the petitioners to show the income of the deceased, considering the age and avocation of the deceased, the Tribunal has rightly taken the income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- per month, out of which half of the income is deducted towards personal expenses, as the deceased is a bachelor and by applying multiplier '18', awarded an amount of Rs.6,48,000/-. Further the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses. Thus, in total, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.6,78,000/-, which is just and reasonable. Thus, there are no valid grounds to interfere with the findings of the Tribunal on this aspect.
5
GSD, J MACMA.No.2127 of 2019
12. With regard to the liability, it is contended by the appellant- Insurance Company that the deceased was travelled on the tractor and trolley at the time of accident as unauthorized passenger and therefore, they are not liable to pay compensation to the petitioners. However, following the principles laid down by the Apex Court in 'New India Insurance Company Limited vs. Darshani Devi and others, dated 12.02.2008', the Tribunal rightly directed the respondent No.2- Insurance Company to deposit the compensation within one month from the date of award and recover the same from the respondent No.1. Therefore, in view of the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that there are no valid grounds to interfere with the cogent findings given by the Tribunal and the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
13. The appeal is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________________ JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI 02.12.2022 pgp