Telangana High Court
United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Burra Suvarna And 2 Others on 20 January, 2025
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO
M.A.C.M.A No.243 OF 2014
JUDGMENT:
Aggrieved by the award passed by the learned X Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad (for short 'the tribunal') in M.V.O.P.No.903 of 2008, dated 18.09.2013, United India Insurance Company preferred this appeal.
2. Heard Sri C.Narender Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri M.Srinivas Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.1.
3. Brief facts of the case:
3.1. On 07.02.2008, respondent No.1 was traveling in Tata Sumo bearing No.AP 24 U 6444, along with her relatives towards Choutuppal and when they reached the outskirts of Dharmajigudem Village on NH-9, the driver drove the Tata Sumo in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the container vehicle bearing No.TN 04 B 5963, which was coming from opposite side. As a result, the Tata Sumo turned turtle and all the inmates fell down and respondent No.1 2 JSR,J MACMA_243_2014 sustained injuries on her left eye and all other parts of the body.
4. Submissions of learned counsel for the appellant- Insurance Company:
4.1. Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company submits that the accident was occurred due to rash and negligent driving of driver of Tata Sumo and the subject vehicle is carrying more passengers than permitted capacity.
In such circumstances, the tribunal ought to have granted compensation against respondent No.2, owner of Tata Sumo and not against the appellant-Insurance Company. He further submits that the tribunal, in the absence of any evidence, granted compensation of an amount of Rs.92,500/-.
5. Submissions of learned counsel for respondent No.1:
5.1. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 submits that the tribunal after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record has rightly granted compensation in favour of respondent No.1 and there are no grounds in the appeal.
3 JSR,J MACMA_243_2014
6. Analysis:
6.1. This Court considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and perused the record. It is not in dispute that respondent No.1 sustained injuries due to rash and negligent driving of driver of Tata Sumo. The record discloses that respondent No.1 sustained blunt injury to her pelvis, on the back and on the left side of the eye at cornea.
PW-2 in his evidence specifically stated that the injuries sustained by respondent No.1 are grievous in nature. The record further discloses that respondent No.1 initially treated at Government Hospital, Choutuppal and thereafter, she was shifted to S.V.Hospitals, Balapur X Road. The tribunal after taking into consideration of Exs.A1 to A4, held that the accident was occurred due to rash and negligent driving of driver of Tata Sumo and taking into consideration of Exs.A5 to A10 and evidence of PWs.1 and 2, rightly awarded an amount of Rs.92,500/-. Hence, this Court does not find any ground to interfere with the impugned award passed by the tribunal.
7. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. No costs.
4 JSR,J MACMA_243_2014 Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
______________________________ JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO Date : 20.01.2025 vsl