Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
The United India Insurance Company ... vs C. Maruthamma 5 Ors on 6 August, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AMARAVATHI
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
M.A.C.M.A.No.2302 of 2007
Between:
The United India Insurance Company, Ltd.,
rep. by its Divisional Manager,
Division Office, Ananthapur,
Now Represented by its Deputy Manager,
Regional Office, United India Towers,
Post Box No.1020, H.NO.3-5-817 & 818,
Basheerbagh, Hyderabad.
...Appellant/Respondent No.2
and
C.Maruthamma, W/o.Sanjeevarayudu,
and six others
...Respondents/petitioners/Respondent No.6
Counsel for the appellant : Sri Maheswar Rao Kuncheam
Counsel for 2nd respondent : Sri I.Venkata Prasad
This Court made the following:
JUDGMENT:
This appeal is filed by the United India Insurance Company Limited
represented by its Divisional Manager, Ananthapur, against the order and
decree dated 18.07.2006 passed by the Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims
Tribunal-cum-V Addl. District Judge, FTC, Ananthapur (hereinafter referred to
as "the Tribunal") in M.V.O.P.No.111 of 2004, filed under Sections 140 and
166 of Motor Vehicle Act 1988 and Rule 455 of A.P.M.V. Rules 1989,
awarding compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- to respondent Nos.1 to 5
herein/petitioners.
JS,J
2. For convenience and to avoid confusion, the parties hereinafter will be
referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal.
3. The petitioners' case is that the deceased worked as a Supervisor in
Vijayawada Auto Works, Anantapur. On 05.08.2003, the deceased requested
the owner of the car bearing No.ABA 1889 to give his car to go to Bhadravathi
to attend the funerals of his tenant relatives. On requisition, the owner of the
car, who is the proprietor of Vijayawada Auto Works, Anantapur, accepted the
deceased's request. Then, the deceased took the car on 06.08.2003 and at
about 5.30 a.m., the car crossed Chitradurg and while the car was proceeding
to Devannunda Hatti, the driver of the car drove it rashly and negligently and
dashed the bus bearing No.KA 16 A 3983, which was parked on the left side
of the road. As a result, the car was partially damaged, the deceased died on
the spot, and the persons who were travelling along with the deceased were
injured. The 1st respondent is the owner, and the 2nd respondent is the insurer
of the bus. The 3rd respondent is the owner, and the 4th respondent is the car
insurer. Therefore, all the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay
compensation to the petitioners.
4. The Tribunal, by an order dated 18.07.2006, dismissed the claim
petition against respondents Nos.1 and 2 and allowed the claim petition
against respondents Nos.3 and 4 by granting compensation of Rs.2,50,000/-
with costs and interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of
realisation. Questioning the same, the present appeal is filed by respondent
No.2-Insurance Company.
JS,J
5. Heard both sides.
6. The deceased worked as a supervisor under the 3rd respondent, the car
owner and proprietor of Vijayawada Auto Works, Anantapur. The deceased
was earning Rs.4,000/- per month at the time of the accident. The accident
occurred at 5.30 a.m. on 06.08.2003, when the opposite vehicle, i.e., the bus
was stopped on the road without any signals. The accident was not due to the
deceased's negligence but due to the bus not being parked without putting in
the proper signals when the vehicle was stopped on the road. The bus
belonged to Karnataka State, and the incident happened at Bhadravathi, no
action was taken against the bus, which was parked on the road without any
signals, and the bus was set free. The Tribunal has rightly concluded and
passed the award, and this Court cannot interfere with the same.
7. I don't find any manifest error in the findings arrived at by the Tribunal,
and I also see no force in the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for
the appellant. The appeal is devoid of merits, and it is accordingly dismissed.
The order and decree dated 18.07.2006 passed by the Motor Vehicle
Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Addl. District Judge, FTC, Ananthapur, are
confirmed. No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also
stand closed.
_____________________
SUMATHI JAGADAM, J
Date: 06.08.2024
BSK
JS,J
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
Date: 06.08.2024
BSK
