Telangana High Court
The United India Insurance Co., ... vs Smt. Kummari Anjamma on 2 February, 2022
Bench: G Sri Devi
THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI
M.A.C.M.A. No.2359 OF 2013
JUDGMENT :
This appeal is by the insurance company aggrieved by the order
dated 04.05.2010 in O.P.No.579 of 2008, on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I-Additional District Judge, Medak at
Sangareddy (for short 'the Tribunal'), wherein the claim of the
respondents/claimants herein was allowed, awarding compensation of
Rs.8 lakhs with proportionate costs and interest at 8% per annum from
the date of the petition.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company
and the learned counsel for respondents/claimants. Perused the
record.
3. The respondents herein filed the claim petition seeking
compensation of Rs.8 lakhs on account of death of the deceased
Kummari Sathaiah, who died in a motor vehicle accident that
occurred on 08.06.2008 at 11:30 am. Claimant No.1 is the wife,
claimants 2 to 4 are the children and claimant No.5 is the mother of
the deceased. According to the claimants, at the time of accident, the
deceased was going on his TVS moped from tower to his village and
when he reached the sub-station of Ordnance Factory, Eddumailaram
on the outskirts of Indrakaran Village, a Hero Honda Passion
Motorcycle bearing No.AP-23F-7599, driven by its rider in a rash and
negligent manner, at high speed, dashed the TVS moped of the
deceased, as a result of which, the deceased sustained fracture of both
legs and injuries on head and other parts of the body. Immediately,
he was shifted to Ordnance Factory Hospital, where he succumbed to
injuries on the same day at about 02:00 pm. It is pleaded by the
claimants that the deceased was a permanent employee of Ordnance
Factory and was designated as Painter (highly skilled) at the time of
accident and was drawing a gross salary of Rs.13,238/- per month.
3. The first respondent-owner of the offending vehicle and second
respondent-insurer filed separate counters opposing the claim and
denying their liability to pay the compensation.
4. The Tribunal, on appreciation of the oral and documentary
evidence on record, allowed the O.P., awarding a total compensation
of Rs.8 lakhs along with proportionate costs and interest @ 8% per
annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. Aggrieved
thereby, the appellant-insurance company has filed this appeal.
5. The learned standing counsel for the appellant-insurance
company contended that the order and decree of the Tribunal is
contrary to law, weight of evidence and probabilities of the case; that
the Tribunal has erred in fastening the liability on the appellant-
insurance company; that the amount awarded is exorbitant.
Accordingly, he prayed for setting aside the impugned order in the
O.P.
6. On a perusal of the order of the Tribunal, I am of the considered
view that there are no valid grounds to interfere with the findings of
the Tribunal. The Tribunal has taken rightly all the aspects
into consideration and passed a reasoned order. The amount of
Rs.8 lakhs awarded by the Tribunal towards compensation cannot,
by any means, be considered to be excessive or unreasonable.
The impugned award passed by the Tribunal does not, therefore, call
for any interference by this Court.
7. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs.
8. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________
JUSTICE G.SRI DEVI
Date: 02.02.2022
Lrkm
