The United India Insurance Co. ... vs Muddidhe Ravinder Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 5014 Tel

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.SANTHOSH REDDY

                 M.A.C.M.A.No.1281 OF 2016
JUDGMENT:

This appeal is directed against the award dated 14.12.2011

in M.V.O.P.No.477 of 2007, on the file of the Chairman, Motor

Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge,

Karimnagar (for short 'the Tribunal), wherein the said claim

application filed by appellant herein seeking compensation was

allowed-in-part, awarding Rs.67,000/- with interest at 7.5% per

annum from the date of petition.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel

for the 2nd respondent-owner of the lorry. Perused the material on

record.

3. The 1st respondent herein filed claim application seeking

compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- for the injuries sustained by him

in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 17.06.2005.

According to the claimant, on that day, he and his friends were

travelling in a jeep bearing No.AEO 2323 to attend the marriage of

their friend at Laxmipur Village and when they reached the

outskirts of Kamalapur, near Madadi Ramachandra Reddy mango

garden, a lorry bearing No.MP 44 J 0137, driven by its driver in a

rash and negligent manner in high speed came in the opposite

direction and dashed the jeep, as a result of which the claimant

sustained fracture injury to his right hand, besides other injuries.

He was shifted to MGM Hospital, Warangal where he underwent

operation for setting the fractured bones with implants. Police,

Kamalapur registered a case in Cr.No.83 of 2005 against the driver

of the lorry for the offence punishable under Sections 338 IPC.

According to the claimant, he was hale and healthy at the time of

accident and he owns agricultural land earning Rs.60,000/- per

annum.

4. The appellant-insurer and respondent No.2-insured filed

separate counters opposing the claim and denying their liability to

pay the compensation.

5. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the

Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and

negligent driving of the lorry by its driver. The Tribunal further

held that the claimant was entitled for a total compensation of

Rs.67,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum. Aggrieved by the

same, the insurer filed the present appeal.

6. The only question that arises for consideration is - whether

the driver of the lorry was having a valid driving licence as on the

date of accident?

7. A perusal of the material on record, in particular, Ex.A-4

crime details form (Form No.54), would disclose that in column

No.7B, the driving licence number of the lorry driver i.e.,

AP101/229/PAC/2005 was mentioned. During trial, on behalf of

the insurer, R.W.1 was examined. In cross-examination, when

R.W.1 was confronted with the driving licence number of lorry

driver, he admitted the same. It is clear from the same that the

driver of the offending lorry was having valid driving licence at the

time of accident and, accordingly, the insurer and the insured

(owner) were jointly and severally held liable to pay the

compensation. The insurer has not placed any other evidence on

record in support of his contention that the driver of the offending

vehicle was not holding valid driving licence. In view of the above,

the contention of learned counsel for the insurer cannot be

accepted. The findings of the Tribunal are based on proper

appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record and it

is also proved that the driver of the offending vehicle was holding

valid driving licence as on the date of accident.

8. I do not find any merit in the appeal and the same is liable to

be dismissed.

9. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. There shall be no

order as to costs.

10. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed.

_______________________ A.SANTHOSH REDDY, J 11.10.2022 Lrkm