1 RRN,J
MACMA No.1062 of 2015
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
M.A.C.M.A.No.1062 OF 2015
JUDGMENT:
This MACMA is filed by the appellant/petitioner under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, aggrieved by the order and decree, dated 17.11.2011, passed in M.A.T.O.P.No.591 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge (FTC, Khammam) (for short "the Tribunal").
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation of Rs.50,000/- on account of injuries sustained by the petitioner in the motor vehicle accident. On 15.09.2002, the petitioner along with one Shaik Kamal boarded auto bearing No.AP-U-9134 at a Kalvavoddu of Khammam proceeding to his village and when it reached near Church of Kachirajugudem Village at about 8 p.m., another 2 RRN,J M.A.C.M.A.No.1062 of 2015 auto bearing No.AP-20-U-7793 which came in an opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner with high speed dashed against the auto, due to which the petitioner sustained multiple grievous injuries and fractures to his right thigh. The Police Khammam Rural registered a case in Cr.No.270 of 2002 against the driver of the auto AP-20-U-7793. The petitioner is a coolie by profession and because of the said accident, he is not in a position to attend his coolie work and is not able to attend even normal duties. Hence the claim petition.
4. Respondent No.1 remained ex parte before the Tribunal. Respondent Nos.2 and 3/Insurance Companies filed counter affidavits by denying all the material averments and stated that the accident occurred only due to gross negligence on the part of the driver of auto No.AP-20-U-9134. Respondent No.2 has categorically stated that no policy was subsisting as on the date of the accident and respondent No.1 had obtained a policy with them after three days from the date of the accident. Respondent No.3 has categorically the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid driving licence, due to which, 3 RRN,J M.A.C.M.A.No.1062 of 2015 conditions of the policy are violated. As such respondents are not liable to pay any compensation. Hence, they prayed for the dismissal of the petition.
5. To prove his case, the petitioner examined himself as PW.1 and got marked Exs.A1 to A4 and the respondents examined RW.1 and RW.2 and got marked Exs.B1 to B4.
6. On appreciating the evidence on record, the Tribunal allowed the petition in part by granting compensation of Rs.25,000/- to the petitioner with a directing that only the 1st respondent/owner of the vehicle is liable to pay the compensation amount and the respondents No.2 and 3/Insurance Companies were exonerated from their liability. Hence, the present appeal is filed by the petitioner.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 and perused the record.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that Tribunal ought to have fixed liability against respondents No.2 4 RRN,J M.A.C.M.A.No.1062 of 2015 and 3 as the Insurance policies were subsisting both at the time of, and after the accident. Accordingly, prayed to allow the appeal.
9. Learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3/Insurance Companies contended that as respondent No.1 violated the terms of the policy, the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the claim against them. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the appeal.
10. Upon bare reading of the impugned order, it is observed that the Tribunal found that the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company is not liable to pay compensation as per Ex.B1/policy which was in force from 18.09.2002 to 17.09.2003 whereas admittedly, the accident occurred on 15.09.2002. Hence, this Court finds no error in the above finding of the Tribunal.
11. With respect to the findings of the Tribunal in favour of 3rd respondent/Insurance Company, it is observed that the Tribunal exonerated the 3rd respondent from the liability on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid driving licence which resulted in violation of policy. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Limited 5 RRN,J M.A.C.M.A.No.1062 of 2015 vs Swaran Singh & others1 and in the catena of decisions, directed the Insurance Company to pay the compensation and liberty is granted to it to recover the paid amount from the owner of the vehicle, in case of violation of conditions of Insurance Policy. Applying this decision to the present case, this Court is of the view that the 3rd respondent/Insurance Company can be directed to pay the compensation amount to the petitioner and recover the same from the respondent as it is established that the policy issued by the 3rd respondent in favour of the 1st respondent was very much in force as on the date of the accident.
12. With regard to the quantum of compensation, this Court finds no reason to enhance the same as there is no compelling evidence adduced by the petitioner to prove that he is entitled to higher compensation. As such, the Tribunal was justified in awarding Rs.25,000/- to the petitioner.
1
2004 (3) SCC 297
6 RRN,J
M.A.C.M.A.No.1062 of 2015
13. In view of the foregoing reasons, this appeal deserves to be allowed in part, however, without interfering with the quantum of compensation.
14. Accordingly, the M.A.C.M.A. is allowed in part. The 3rd respondent/Insurance Company is directed to pay the compensation amount of Rs.25,000/- with interest at 7.5% from the date of petition till the date of realisation within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner is permitted to withdraw the entire amount upon such deposit. The 3rd respondent/Insurance Company is at liberty to recover the amount from the 1st respondent/owner of the vehicle. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel of which, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.
_____________________________________ NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, J 15th March, 2023 PNS/BDR