National Insurance Company ... vs Shanta Bai
2021 Latest Caselaw 4863 AP

               HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

                          M.A.C.M.A.No. 2970 of 2005

JUDGMENT: (Heard and pronounced through Blue Jeans App (Virtual)
          mode, since this mode is adopted on account of prevalence of
          COVID-19 pandemic)

      The present appeal was preferred by the National Insurance Company

Limited against the award and decree dated 12.07.2005 in M.V.O.P.No.32 of 2001

on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-VI Additional

District Judge (FTC), Anantapur at Gooty (for short 'the Claims Tribunal').


2.    For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to, as they

were arrayed before the Claims Tribunal in the original petition.


3.    The petitioners filed the aforesaid original petition seeking a compensation

of Rs.2,00,000/- for the death of one Mr. A. Venkataramana in a road accident that

occurred on 21.03.2000. In the claim petition, it is averred that the deceased used

to do cloth business and earn Rs.10,000/- per month. It is the specific case of the

petitioners that on 21.03.2000 said A.Venkataramana and others engaged a lorry

bearing registration No. ABG 4959 for transporting cloth bundles from Hyderabad

to Pamidi. As the said lorry was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent

manner, it fell down in a ditch, as a result of which, said A. Venkataramana and

others sustained injuries and later said A. Venkataramana died in the Government

General Hospital, Kurnool.


4.    In support of their case, the petitioners examined P.Ws.1 and 2 and got

marked Exs.A.1 to A.4.
                                             2
                                                                                       NJS,J
                                                                         MACMA No.2970/2005



5.    The 1st respondent, the owner of the offending lorry, filed a written

statement stating that the deceased travelled in the lorry as owner of the goods and

therefore, the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation.

6. On behalf of the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company, a counter-affidavit was

filed and R.W.1 was examined.

7. After considering the submissions and examining both the oral and

documentary evidence, the Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as

claimed in the original petition.

8. Mr. T.S. Rayalu, learned standing counsel for the appellant-Insurance

Company, submits that the award and decree of the Claims Tribunal are erroneous

and contrary to the evidence on record. He submits that though the deceased was

travelling as an unauthorized passenger in a goods vehicle, the Claims Tribunal

failed to appreciate the contentions advanced on behalf of the Insurance Company

in a correct perspective and fastened the liability on the Insurance Company, which

is not justified in the facts and circumstances of the case. He also submits that the

version of the petitioners that the deceased was carrying cloth bundles in the lorry

deserves no appreciation, since the cloth bundles can as well be carried in any

passenger vehicle like bus, etc. He submits that except the oral and documentary

evidence, there is no material on record i.e., bills, etc. to substantiate the case of the

petitioners that the deceased purchased the cloth bundles and was travelling in the

offending vehicle as owner of the goods. He further submits that the Claims

Tribunal went wrong in fastening the liability on the Insurance Company, though

NJS,J MACMA No.2970/2005

there is violation of terms and conditions of the policy. He submits that the interest

as awarded by the Claims Tribunal at 9% p.a. on the compensation awarded is

exorbitant. Contending so, the learned standing counsel prays to set aside the

award of the Claims Tribunal.

9. This Court has considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for

the appellant-Insurance company and perused the material on record.

10. As seen from the award of the Claims Tribunal, while answering Issue No.1,

the Claims Tribunal had taken into consideration both the oral and documentary

evidence adduced on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3-petitioners and recorded a

categorical finding with reference to the material on record and concluded that the

deceased was travelling in the offending lorry as owner of the goods (cloth

bundles) and died due to the accident. The Claims Tribunal had also recorded a

categorical finding that no contrary evidence was placed to disprove the version

that the deceased travelled in the crime lorry as owner of the goods. This Court, in

view of the categorical conclusions arrived at by the Claims Tribunal on thorough

consideration of the evidence on record, is not inclined to re-appreciate the

evidence. Though the learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company

contended that the cloth bundles can as well be transported in any passenger

vehicle like bus, etc., it is not known under what circumstances the deceased was

constrained to carry his goods in a goods vehicle i.e., the offending lorry. Further,

as rightly pointed out by the Claims Tribunal, no contra evidence was placed to

disprove the version of the petitioners that the deceased was travelling along with

the goods at the time of the accident. In view of the categorical finding recorded

NJS,J MACMA No.2970/2005

by the Claims Tribunal that the deceased was travelling in the offending lorry as

owner of the goods, the contention of the learned standing counsel for the

Insurance Company that the deceased was travelling as a gratuitous passenger,

cannot be accepted. Accordingly, the contentions advanced by the learned

standing counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company are rejected. However,

insofar as awarding of interest @ 9% p.a. is concerned, this Court finds merit in the

same and accordingly, the interest is reduced from 9% p.a. to 7.5% p.a.

11. Accordingly, the M.A.C.M.A. is allowed in part to the extent of reduction of

rate of interest as indicated above. Except with regard to the rate of interest, the

award of the Claims Tribunal is confirmed. No order as to costs.

12. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the appeal shall

stand disposed of.

_______________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J 27th October, 2021 cbs

NJS,J MACMA No.2970/2005

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

M.A.C.M.A.No. 2970 of 2005

27th October, 2021

cbs

NJS,J MACMA No.2970/2005