THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI
M.A.C.M.A. No.3624 of 2009
JUDGMENT :
This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company aggrieved of the order and decree dated 03.09.2005 in O.P.No.43 of 2001 on the file of I Additional District Judge, Mahabubnagar.
2. On 05.11.2000, due to the rash and negligent driving of DCM Van bearing No.AP-9-W-197 by its driver, it dashed to a stationed lorry, due to which, the deceased/Mirjapur Devadas, who was travelling in the said DCM Van, sustained fatal injuries and died while shifting to the hospital.
3. The Tribunal, on examining the oral and documentary evidence on record, partly allowed the O.P., awarding a total compensation of Rs.7,50,000/- along with costs and interest @7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant-Insurance Company has filed this appeal.
4. Heard both sides and perused the record.
5. The learned Standing Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company contended that the decree of the Tribunal is contrary to law, weight of evidence and probabilities of the case; that the Tribunal has not taken into consideration the violation of terms of policy; that the Tribunal has erred in granting huge compensation without deducting HRA from the salary of deceased; that the multiplier applied by the 2 GSD, J MACMA.No.3624 of 2009 Tribunal is on higher side. Accordingly, prayed for setting aside the award of the Tribunal.
6. On a perusal of the material on record, the order and decree of the Tribunal, I am of the considered view that there are no valid grounds to interfere with the findings of the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after taking into account the earnings of the deceased, who was a public servant working as a Telugu Pandit Grade-II, granted compensation of Rs.7,50,000/- and this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same.
7. However, the grievance of the appellant-Insurance Company is that in paras 37 to 39 of the Award, the Tribunal has categorically dealt with the issue of gratuitous passengers and categorically held that the appellant-Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation and to recover the same from the insured in the manner provided in the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pramod Kumar Agrawal & others v. Mushtari Begum & others1 and in National Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office, Hindupur v. Sowmya & others2. However, while drawing the decree, the same was not mentioned.
8. Since the Tribunal has already directed the Insurance Company to pay compensation and to recover the same from the insured, it has 1 2004 SAR (Civil) 745 (SC) 2 2004 (3) T.A.C. 94 (A.P.) 3 GSD, J MACMA.No.3624 of 2009 to be incorporated in the decree in order to enable the Insurance Company to recover the same from the insured.
9. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of with a direction to incorporate in the impugned decree that the Insurance Company is entitled to recover the compensation amount from the insured. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________ JUSTICE G.SRI DEVI Date: 19.01.2022 ajr