Telangana High Court
The National Insurance Company ... vs Banda Amrutha Reddy on 2 February, 2022
Bench: G Sri Devi
THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI
M.A.C.M.A.No.2350 OF 2013
JUDGMENT:
This appeal is filed by the insurance company aggrieved by
the order dated 31.01.2013 in O.P.No.507 of 2007, on the file of the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-III-Additional District Judge
(I FTC), Nalgonda (for short 'the Tribunal'), wherein the claim of
respondent No.1 herein/claimant was allowed-in-part, awarding total
compensation of Rs.2,05,000/- with proportionate costs and interest at
7.5% per annum from the date of the petition till realization.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-insurance company
and the learned counsel for respondent No.1-claimant. Perused the
record.
3. Respondent No.1 herein filed the claim petition seeking
compensation of Rs.3 lakhs on account of the injuries sustained by
him in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 01.09.2006. On the
fateful day, the claimant was travelling in car bearing No.AP 09 BD
T/R 9666 from Nagarjuna Sagar to Hyderabad and when the car
reached near Polepally stage of Chinthapally Mandal, Nalgonda
District, one jeep bearing No.AP 29 T 1554, driven by its driver in
a rash and negligent manner, at high speed, dashed the car coming in
the opposite direction. Owing to the said accident, the claimant and
other inmates of the car sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, the
claimant was shifted to Yashoda Hospital, Hyderabad for treatment.
A case in Cr.No.116 of 2006 was registered against the driver of the
jeep by Chinthapally Police for the offences punishable under
Sections 304-A, 337 IPC
4. The owner of the offending vehicle remained ex parte.
The insurance company filed counter opposing the claim and denying
their liability to pay the compensation.
5. The Tribunal, on appreciation of the oral and documentary
evidence on record, allowed the O.P., in part, awarding a total
compensation of Rs.2,05,000/- along with proportionate costs
and interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition. Aggrieved
thereby, the appellant-insurance company has preferred the present
appeal.
6. A perusal of the award of the Tribunal shows that the Tribunal
has rightly assessed the income of the injured claimant and has also
rightly awarded the amounts under various heads, which cannot be
said to be either excessive or exorbitant. The Tribunal, after
considering all the aspects into consideration, has rightly awarded
the total compensation of Rs.2,05,000/- under various heads.
The findings of the Tribunal need no interference.
7. However, it has been submitted by learned counsel for the
appellant-insurance company that the Tribunal has given a finding to
the effect that the appellant-insurance company has to pay the
compensation to the claimant at the first instance and later recover the
same from owner of the offending vehicle i.e., jeep by initiating
separate proceedings. The learned standing counsel further submitted
that the said finding of the Tribunal to recover the compensation
amount from respondent No.1-owner of the offending vehicle i.e.,
jeep later ought to have been in the same proceedings, instead of
initiating separate proceedings.
8. However, in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in
MANUARA KHATUN V. RAJESH KR. SINGH1, this court directs
the insurance company to pay the compensation amount with
proportionate interest and costs at the first instance to the claimant
and later recover the same from owner of the offending vehicle in the
same proceedings, and not by initiating separate proceedings. To the
limited extent, the order of the Tribunal is hereby set aside.
9. The appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated above.
No costs.
10. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________
JUSTICE G.SRI DEVI
Date: 02.02.2022
Lrkm
(2017) 4 SCC 796
