United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Battapothula Prakash
2023 Latest Caselaw 143 Tel

     THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI

               M.A.C.M.A. No. 745 of 2019

JUDGMENT:

This appeal is preferred by the appellant-Insurance

Company, questioning the award and decree, dated

20.11.2018 made in O.P.No.923 of 2013 on the file of the

Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Special

Sessions Judge for Trial of SCs/STs (POA) Cases-cum-

Additional District Judge, Nalgonda (for short, the

Tribunal).

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties have been

referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. The claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the

Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-

for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle

accident that took place on 26.02.2004. According to the

claimant, on 26.02.2004 at about 9:00 p.m., while the

claimant was proceeding as a pillion rider on the Scooter

and when he reached Khammam Cross Road, Kodad, one

Auto bearing No.AP 24 V 1438, owned by respondent No.1

MGP, J Macma_745_2019

and insured with respondent No.2, being driven by its

driver in a rash and negligent manner at high speed,

dashed the scooter, as a result of which, the claimant

sustained grievous injuries. Immediately after the

accident, the claimant was shifted to St. Moher Theresa

Hospital and from there he was shifted to Government

Hospital, Kodad and private hospital. Therefore, the

claimant laid the claim seeking compensation of

Rs.1,00,000/-.

4. After considering the claim-petition, counter filed by

respondent No.2, appellant herein, oral and documentary

evidence on record, the Tribunal came to the conclusion

that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent

driving of driver of the Auto and awarded total

compensation of Rs.50,000/- with interest @ 6% per

annum payable by respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and

severally. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant-

Insurance Company filed the present appeal.

MGP, J Macma_745_2019

5. Heard both sides and perused the material on

available on record.

6. The contention of the learned Standing Counsel

appearing for the appellant, insurance company, is that the

Tribunal erred in fastening the liability on the insurance

company though the crime vehicle was not insured with

the appellant. In support of his contentions, he relied

upon the judgments of the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh High

Court in United India Insurance Company Limited v.

Purrai Kishore1 and Bajaj Allianz General Insurance

Company Limited v. Bhumi Reddy Venkata Satya

Rama Rao2.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant has

submitted that considering the nature of the injury caused

to the spinal cord and the amount spent by the claimant

during the course of treatment, the Tribunal has awarded

just compensation, which needs no interference. Insofar

as the liability is concerned, it is contended that the crime

2004 (4) ALD 238

2009 (5) ALD 202

MGP, J Macma_745_2019

vehicle was insured with the appellant vide policy

No.352336 valid from 22.10.2003 to 21.10.2004, and

therefore, the Tribunal has rightly fastened the liability on

the appellant. Hence, the learned counsel prayed for

dismissal of the appeal.

8. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that insofar

as the manner in which the accident took place, the

Tribunal has framed the Issue No.1 as to whether the

accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of

the driver of the Auto, to which the Tribunal has

categorically observed that the accident has occurred due

to the rash and negligent driving of the Auto by its driver

and has answered the issue in favour of the claimant and

against the respondents.

9. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is

concerned, the Tribunal passed a well reasoned order by

taking into consideration all the aspects i.e., the disability

sustained by the claimant, nature of treatment undergone

by him, medical expenses, extra diet and pain and

MGP, J Macma_745_2019

suffering, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.50,000/-

with interest. Therefore, I see no reason to interfere with

the order of the Tribunal and the appeal is liable to be

dismissed.

10. As regards the liability of the appellant to pay the

compensation, in the cause title of the claim-petition as

well as the award itself shows that the crime vehicle was

insured with the appellant vide Policy No.352336 which

was valid from 22.10.2003 to 21.10.2004. Though the

cause title of the claim-petition itself discloses the policy

number and its validity, the appellant did not produce any

evidence to show that the said policy was not issued to the

crime vehicle. Therefore, the Tribunal was right in

fastening the liability on the appellant. The judgments

relied upon by the learned Standing Counsel for the

appellant are not at all applicable to the present case as

the facts in those judgments and the present case are

different. Hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the

MGP, J Macma_745_2019

findings arrived at by the Tribunal and the appeal is liable

to be dismissed.

11. Accordingly, the M.A.C.M.A. is dismissed confirming

the order and decree passed by the Tribunal. There shall

be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand

closed.

_________________________ JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI

06.01.2023 Tsr

MGP, J Macma_745_2019

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI

M.A.C.M.A. No. 745 of 2019

DATE: 06-01-2023