United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Kasam Buchaiah And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 3881 Tel

     THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI

                 M.A.C.M.A. No.823 of 2015

JUDGMENT :

This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company aggrieved

of the order and decree dated 11.03.2013 in M.V.O.P.No.202

of 2011 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-III

Additional District Judge (FTC), Asifabad.

2. On 04.01.1996, due to the rash and negligent driving of

Ambassador Car bearing No.AAU-5014 by its driver, it dashed

against the deceased who was walking on the left side of the

road at Kalamadgu village, due to which, the deceased Kasam

Rayalingam sustained severe injuries and succumbed to

injuries on the same day while undergoing treatment.

3. The Tribunal, on examining the oral and documentary

evidence on record, partly allowed the O.P., awarding a total

compensation of Rs.1,13,000/- along with costs and interest

@ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of

realization. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant-Insurance

Company has filed this appeal.

4. Heard both sides and perused the record.

JS, J MACMA.No.823 of 2015

5. The learned Standing Counsel for the appellant-

Insurance Company has contended that the decree of the

Tribunal is contrary to law, weight of evidence and

probabilities of the case. It is contended that at the time of

accident, there is no policy subsisting to cover the risk and in

that view of the matter, it ought to have exonerated the

appellant from its liability. It is contended that the Tribunal

below erred in law in observing that Respondents have not

adduced any rebuttal evidence regarding their liability and

there is no representation by the respondent counsel, hence

both the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay

compensation, especially when the appellant is represented

by the counsel and adduced the oral evidence of RW.1 and

disputing the liability. Accordingly, prayed for setting aside

the impugned order in the O.P.

6. A perusal of the material on record, it is evident that the

claimant has filed the MVI report marked as Ex.A5, as per

which, the vehicle was insured and the insurance is valid up to

20.06.1996, whereas, the accident had occurred on

04.01.1996. Thus, it is clear that the vehicle was insured as

on the date of accident. Therefore, I am of the considered

JS, J MACMA.No.823 of 2015

view that the Tribunal has awarded the just compensation

after taking into consideration the entire evidence on record

and there are no valid grounds to interfere with the findings of

the Tribunal. Since there is no illegality or infirmity in the

impugned order and decree warranting interference by this

Court, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

7. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

closed.

______________________ JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI Date:14.11.2023 ksk